Skip to main content

Full text of "The Heritage Lodge no. 730, A.F. & A.M., G.R.C. : proceedings 1985-1986"

See other formats

The Heritage Lodge 

No. 730, A.F. & A.M., G.R.C. 

Instituted: Sept. 21, 1977 
Constituted: Sept., 23, 1978 


Vol. 9, 1985 - 86 

Worshipful Master: 

R.W.Bro. Robert S. Throop 

Editor: R.W.Bro. Jacob (Jack) Pos 

10 Mayfield Avenue, 
Guelph, Ont., N1G 2L8 


It is with pleasure that I write the 
introduction to the Proceedings for the year 

Without detracting in any way from the 
authors of the other papers presented during 
this fiscal year, I nevertheless feel 
compelled to make special mention of the 
outstanding lecture given by Br. the Hon. 
John Ross Matheson on the occasion of the 
second annual Heritage Banquet. In my 
opinion this lecture will make this edition of 
our Proceedings a treasured possession for the 
serious student of Masonry for years to come. 

The aims and objectives of the Heritage 
Lodge seem to be moving along at a goodly 
pace. The emphasis placed on preserving our 
Masonic historical knowledge is quite clear in 
our seven principal objectives. 

It has been said that through history one 
is persuaded to develop critical attitudes, 
and in the words of Thomas Jefferson "A judge 
of the actions and design of men". 

It was Francis Bacon who wrote "History 
makes men wise". Let us hope that our efforts 
in this regard in the Heritage Lodge No. 730 
will foster and promote Masonic wisdom in 
ourselves and in those who follow. 

It has been indeed an honour to serve as 
the ninth Worshipful Master of the Heritage 

Robert S. Throop W.M. 

Worshipful Master, 1985 - 86 

Initiated in Harmony Lodge No. 370, 19^6 

Wor. Master of Temple Lodge No. 665, I963 

Affil. member of Temple Lodge No. 666, ... I965 

Affil. member of Temple Lodge No. 649, ... 1976 

Honourary member of Simpson Lodge No. 15? 1 1984 

Affil. member The Heritage Lodge No. 730,. 1978 

Grand Senior Warden, G.R.C 1973 

Member of Board of General Purposes, 1979- 

Kingston Lodge of Perfection, A.& A.S.R.,. 1972 

Rose of 'Sharon Chapter Rose Croix 1973 

Moore Sovereign Consistory, 1973 

H.R.A. Pentalpha Chapter No. 28, Oshawa, . I983 

Affil. member Toronto Lodge of Perfection 

and Sovereign Chapter Rose Croix, . 1983 



These proceedings introduce several 
innovative and provocative suggestions for 
changes in the organization and management of 
Freemasonry in Ontario. Concerned Masons feel 
strongly that the 'grass-roots' of our 
organization should be given a greater voice 
in planning the future course of our Craft. 
By encouraging active participation through a 
balanced and more equitable representation, 
interest in the Craft can be revitalized and 
the decline in membership reversed. 

The tribulations of Freemasonry in 
Hungary, as reported by V.W.Bro. Emery Gero, 
should remind us all that we, as masons in a 
democratic society, enjoy a unique freedom; 
and we must guard our ramparts against 
dictatorial powers, that could erode this 
freedom, with fervour and zeal. Therefore, 
to insure that apathy and complacency does not 
yield to dictatorial powers, we must promote a 
more aggressive attitude to government by the 

The present structure of Grand Lodge 
makes it difficult to implement major reforms 
or long term committments. Unless a worthy 
project can be completed within a two year 
period, 'rulers' of the Craft are not likely 
to initiate a project that cannot be completed 
during their term of office. Therefore, 
changes are required to allow for or to bring 
about a long term gradual improvement of our 
organization to shift some of the authority to 
a governing body that truly represents the 
overall membership. 



The contributors Proceedings of the Lodge 
are alone responsible for the opinions 
expressed and also for the accuracy of the 
statements made therein. The opinions 
expressed by he contributors do not 
necessarily reflect the opinions, attitudes or 
policies of The Heritage Lodge No. 730, G.R.C. 




Forward, i 

The Worshipful Master, R.W.Bro. Robert 

S. Throop, ii 

Editorial Comments, iii 

Disclaimer, iv 

Table of Contents, v 

^-Substance or Shadow? Masonry Today 

and Maybe Tomorrow I A Point of View 
by V.W.Bro. Stewart Thurtell, 1 

Paper Reviews by: 

R.W.Bro. Carl Casselman, 23 

R.W.Bro. Donald Hall, 26 

R.W.Bro. Murray Wagg, . . 2*7 

Response to Paper Reviews by V.W.Bro. 

S. Thurtell, 30 

Thanking The Speaker by R.W.Bro. Wallace 

E. McLeod, 35 

— New Horizons - For Freemasonry in 

Ontario by R.W.Bro. Jack Pos, 37 

—Fidelity, Fidelity, Fidelity - But To 
Wtet? An Assessment of Freemasonry 
by Bro.The Hon., John R.Matheson Q.C., 56 
—The History of Hungarian Masonry by 

V.W.Bro. Emery I. Gero, 78 

Response to V.W.Bro. Gero's Paper fcy 

R.W.Bro. Balfour LeGresley, 106 

Introduction of W.Bro. Glenson T. Jones 
by R.W.Bro. K.L.Whiting, Sr.G. Warden 
Allied Masonic Degrees of Canada.... 110 
w The Byways of Masonry by W.Bro. 

G.T. Jones, 114 


Response to W.Bro. Jones* Paper by R.W. 

Bro. Rountree, 140 

Our Departed Brethren, 143 

Lodge Officers, Past Masters and 

Committees , 144 

Past Master, R.W.Bro. Balfour LeGresley 146 



A Point of View* 
V.W.Bro. Stewart Thurtell 

The genesis of this paper was the 
writer's experience as a district secretary in 
1978, which produced some original research in 
a paper titled "A Point of Departure" of 
February 1980, and a later one of October 1983 
similarly titled to this presentation, both of 
which were submitted to the Long Range 
Planning Committee of grand Lodge. 

This paper is intended to express concern 
for the frail, incomplete and somewhat 
"ramshackle" organization we call "Masonry." 
It is the writer's hope that it may also be an 
opening waft of a breeze which is becoming the 
winds of change, which are beginning to blow 
away the cobwebs of outmoded certainty. 

Fear of Change, reluctance to embrace new 
concepts, and unwillingness to replace the 
familiar with the novel seem to be inborn in 
the human kind, which may be illustrated by 
the aphorism: "People are down on things 
they are not up on I" 

*Paper presented at the Regular meeting of The 
Heritage Lodge held in the Preseton-Hespeler 
Masonic Temple, Cambridge, Wednesday Evening, 
September 18, 1985. 

Remeniber itl Imprint it on your mind: 
"People are down on things they are not up 
on!" "People are down on things they are not 
up on I" Here is the basic impediment to 
change and reform, and any proposals altering 
the familiar must take this aspect of human 
nature into account. 

It is a truism that the only constant is 
change I Abrupt and fearsome change is: 
Revolution. Gradual and selective change is: 
Evolution. Change by design is: Reform I 

Reform implies re-adjustment of former 
practices for the improvement of conditions. 
Reform ought to be more evolutionary than 
revolutionary . 

I have here in my hand a little fossil, - 
called a "brachiopod" , some 10 to 15 million 
years old, give or take a few million. This 
small creature, akin to the oyster or perhaps 
the scallop, couldn't adapt 1 Thus the 
alternative to evolution becomes: either adapt 
or be turned to stone I I am suggesting some 
proposals to avoid "fossilization", proposals 

I expect will be resisted, but then, - 

the fact of making this presentation must be 
some sort of progress, at thatl 

Before there can be any reforms, or 
changes or working out of new principles, 
somehow or other, we must determine the facts. 
Knowledge being the key to wisdom, wide 
participation in deciding and securing the 
facts is the key to understanding the "reality 
of the Craft", - and once we understand the 
dimensions of our dilemma, - we will no longer 
evade reform or fear change. 

Reform begins with knowledge, - knowledge 

of what we are and have; and what we ought to 
become. With such knowledge we can then 
"test the waters" to decide on the best 
possibilities for achieving our goals. This 
is nothing less than a complete re- thinking of 
the whole Craft in the Province of Ontario. 

The paradoxes innate in the Craft: 

Paradox I 

Attempting to improve our Order requires 
us to examine every facet of the Craft I The 
paradox being: that it is so un-structured, so 
un-coordinated and so disconnected that there 
is absolutely no organization in existence 
within our Order that is capable of carrying 
out such research. 

Paradox II 

In order to study the Craft in depth, a 
new organization must be created to perform 
this task. The reality of setting-up such a 
task force is, in itself, a reform within the 
Order, and something of an act of faith, which 
ultimately step-by-step can determine the 
dimensions of our problems and lead us 
logically to their solutions. 

I trust this is sufficient introduction 
to presentation of my paper, "SUBSTANCE OR 
This paper is a "point of view" for which I 
make no apology. I have tried to avoid the 
use of complicated numbers, slanders and other 
complaint devices, - primarily because the 
whole question is far more complicated and 
convoluted than it appears initially. It may 
appear to be hitting at certain areas in an 
unfair manner, but I don't really think so. 

But I have not found it useful to recite all 
the many problems with which we are beset, due 
to the fact that there are far too many to 
list, and so intertwined that a clear 
description might be almost impossible. At 
least, I was unable to do it. I sincerely 
hope this presentation upsets a few people. 

Masonary in Ontario in 1984 has some 
101,000 members, but can probably boast of no 
more than 10% as active masons, some 7 to 
10,000 at the outside. If Project H*0*M*E is 
any sort of reflection on the level of 
activity, - then 7% is a generous estimate. 
For many years there has been a constant plea 
for increased participation, without apparent 
improvement, which seems to imply that the 
traditional appeal will not work. 

Nowadays, in a highly mobile society 
where the old verities are being called into 
question; where the old values have become 
battered and broken; where time demands on men 
have become enormous; where stress and strain 
are almost normal conditions of life, - the 
very thought of traditional solutions almost 
becomes a guarantee of failure. 

Presumably, men become masons for a 
variety of reasons, but only a few seem to 
become caught up in the lodge activity and 
involve themselves beyond the minimum. It is 
something of a paradox that many of the "rare 
attenders" still continue to pay their dues 
and choose to call themselves masons. Perhaps 
this is due to the claim of belonging to an 
exclusive society which generates a reluctance 
to forswear those solemn promises given in the 
course of receiving the several degrees. 
Whatever this tenuous hold may be, it seems to 
exist, and might be developed mightily by 

reforming the organization into a more 
cohesive, more interactive and responsible 

There are at least two related subjects to be 

1. The gradual erosion of total membership 
due to steadily increasing average age levels 
because of attrition, and little real growth; 

2. The organizational and structural 
weaknesses within the faternity would seem to 
almost force limited participation, and 
perpetuate the innate deficiencies of the 

Any attempt to propose remedies will 
require a description of the patient, a 
diagnosis on the nature of the illness, and 
some prescriptions to restore the body to 


1. There are four levels in the structure: 

(i) the individual lodge; (ii) the Grand 
Lodge; (iii) the Masonic District; 
(iv) the individual mason. 

2. The heart of masonry is in the individual 
lodge with our beautiful ritual as the 
unifying factor. Here the mason is created 
and most masonic careers are accomplished 
entirely within its portals. 

3. The Grand Lodge is the creature of the 
lodges and so, therefore are the Masonic 

Districts, whilst the individual lodges 
operate and manage their own affairs with 
virtual autonomy. 

4. The present structure of masonry is more 
shadow than of substance. The principal 
emphasis of Grand Lodge has been ritual, 
whereby the authority of Grand Lodge has had 
little effect on the operation of the lodges 
except, perhaps, in the role of a 'Vatican 
city" in maintaining the purity of the 
"faith", subject to a few constitutional 
requirements including the financial 

5. While Grand Lodge is presumed to be 
subject to the collective will of the lodges, 
it has not been very representative of or 
responsive and responsible to the needs of the 
lodges, except, perhaps, in an administrative 
sense. The current perception is that the 
Board of General Purposes is too narrowly 
drawn, with the out-lying districts under- 
represented, and where the appointed members 
do not seemingly give broad geographical 
representation . 

6. There is a perception that the Grand Lodge 
sessions are not much of a forum for 
discussion so much as something of a "rubber 
stamp" for policies decided in advance, and 
where procedural red tape makes discussion and 
differences of opinion impossible. Amendments 
to the constitution may be extensively debated 
in the Board of General Purposes prior to the 
annual meeting of Grand Lodge with the open 
sessions limited to ratify such decisions, 
virtually without debate. 

7. To many masons, Grand Lodge is aloof and 
distant and even all-powerful. The Grand 

Master is perceived to be remote, being 
visible only rarely, on the occasion of a 
district reception every two years. Outside 
of the major cities and the Grand Master's 
home territory, no recent Grand Master is 
remembered for having made a fraternal visit 
to a lodge just for fun. 

8. The Masonic District is too often more 
apparent than real, without a continuing 
organization except for a Past Master's and 
Officers Association which, more often than 
not, probably functions primarily as a social 
institution rather than as an administrative 
or directing body. Each year the DDGM's may 
come and go, leaving little impact of 
permanent value in the district. Some 
districts may have some overall programs which 
give continuity, direction and some discipline 
to the lodges, but this is not general or even 

9. The individual lodges continue to operate 
very much on their own. Regardless of lodge 
size, only a very few members will participate 
in making decisions, and likely most of them 
will be Past Masters. Except for certain 
constitutional requirements, each lodge is 
free to act as it chooses, with the presence 
of the Grand Lodge not very relevant . 

Too many lodges have gotten to become 
something like the private fief of a few "long 
tenure" members, reluctant to change, often 
have a cavalier attitude toward the 
constitution and the lodge by-laws and may 
consider any new proposal as akin to treason, 
or worse. Internal reform of a lodge may be 
suspended by some active members in 
consideration of the feelings of "the old 
guard I" 

We applaud these fraternal 
considerations, even though the health of the 
lodge may continue to deteriorate. There are 
rare occasions where a DDGM will be called on 
to impose some discipline on a lodge, and then 
for a particular specific reason. 
Collectively, then, the Grand Lodge (including 
the District) have little influence on the 
individual lodge, and, by extension, to the 
individual mason. 


Project H*0*M*E, if viewed as something of a 
"Masonic Gallup Poll" on masonic participation 
should be cause for alarm I 

In one district, successful as the 8th in 
total amount out of 43 masonic districts 
attracted only 6.42% of the district members 
who contributed directly, with an average of 
$1.46 per member of the district. For 
Ontario as a whole, a total of some 
$117,000.00 was donated from among 101,069 
members, an average of $1.16 per member. 
Stretch the 6.42% figure, let's call it 7% for 
easy figuring, which, if borne out by analysis 
of the contributions made, means that only 
some 7,100 masons participated, which thus 
also means that 94,000 masons did not 
participate. Even if the actual rate of 
participation should be double that one 
district's figure, - it would only be about 
15% I 

The organizing and setting-up of Project 
H*0*M*E in all 43 districts meant building a 
new organization from scratch; getting it to 
function effectively; - and then allowing it 


to collapse and die on completion of the 
project, which demise seems wasteful, needless 
and short-sighted. Any future Ontario-wide 
masonic program will again have to go through 
the same frustrations, follow a similar 
learning curve, likely make the same mistakes 
and then see it die without the Order 
profitting from the experience. 

If 7% turns out to be the general level 
of support; if the "Seven Percenters" are our 
active masons, - then our Order is weak 

The low level of participation can only 
be reversed and improved by strengthening the 
organizational structure so that jurisdiction- 
wide programs can be fitted into an existing 
framework for administration and 
implementation. In fact, a basic objective 
will be shown to be reorganizing the masonic 
district in the re-structuring of the Order. 


The word "reform" in the structural sense 
is to overhaul the mechanism without 
compromising the esoteric and ritualistic 
functions at all I In the past many useful 
programs have been attempted, e.g. masonic 
education. The results have been limited, 
primarily because such programs have been 
really "preaching to the convertedl" 

The reforms suggested here offer, as a 
basic premise, "A Functioning Mechanism must 
Precede Programs* ! 11 " To have a potential for 
any degree of success, such structural reforms 
must be universal and uncompromising. 


1. Reverse the membership decline; 

2. Strengthen all four levels" (i) the lodge; 
(2) the Grand Lodge; (iii) the district; 
(iv) the individual mason. 

From the General Statement on the 
Structure, it is possible that the present 
"shadow organization" can be reformed and 
revitalized to become the basis for a new 
beginning . 


Masonry is a voluntary organization which 
is governed by consent. Its rich heritage is 
glued together by our beautiful ritual. Those 
few, those Seven Percenters, have been keeping 
it alive in the face of massive indifference. 
Craft masonry has, by default, turned the 
masonic interest of many of its members toward 
activity in the appendant bodies; e.g. The 
R.A.M. ; the A. & A.S.R. ; and the Shrine, to 
say nothing of non-masonic activities. 

Thus, any rebuilding program must 
ultimately provide greater scope for its 
members to take part and identify with its 
goals and its activity. Part of that activity 
will be local, within the lodge, and in the 
community. Basic to increased local activity 
is a perception of a higher public profile, 
more community visibility, and even to be 
identified with worthy causes and overall 
local concerns. The local lodge should become 
involved with inter-lodge and district 
activity on an ongoing and continuing basis. 
This must be done to develop the required 
increased participation by the ordinary 
members, as well as by the Past Master's and 


officers. Joint activity implies leadership 
and discipline at the district level, it 
requires increased involvement by the several 
lodges and their members. 

Regional groupings of districts, as 
originally proposed by the Long Range Planning 
Committee for the future system of election to 
the Board of General Purposes promised 
opportunities and scope for involving several 
districts in common programs, and to 
indirectly revitalize an ongoing connection 
with the Grand Lodge. 

A reformed Board of General Purposes, 
more broadly based, more responsive and 
responsible to its electorate would offer the 
prospect of increased vitality and the 
development of new directions in the service 
of the Craft. Improved communications between 
the "grass-roots" and the policy-makers is an 
inviting prospect for an expanding future for 
the Order. 

There are awesome difficulties involved 
in implementing any massive changes and 
reforms, but those men of vision within our 
Order must recognize that ongoing renewal and 
reform are needed if progress is to be 
achieved, to say nothing of the hope for 
survival of our society. 


Service clubs, churches, sporting 
associations and othe broadly based voluntary 
organizations have found it desirable to 
require their local units and regional 
groupings to develop highly organized 
directorates and committees, and to work 


together in inter-region joint projects. Each 
local unit and regional grouping is something 
like a mirror-image of any other. Uniformity 
of structure, communication and reporting, 
using standard manuals and documentation, 
together with overall commitment to a common 
goal are generally conceded to be necessary 
organizational features. 

Local specific committees are usually 
expected to conduct joint regional meetings, 
seminars and workshops with their counterparts 
to educate and develop expertise in their 
particular activity. In such gatherings, firm 
friendships are forged, mutual understanding 
is enhanced, and useful and successful 
activity is fostered. Regional conventions or 
assemblies attract members at every level, 
with a mixture of social activity and serious 
business cementing loyalty and expanding the 
horizons of those attending. 

One of the hallmarks of the service club is 
the built-in expectation that each and every 
member will contribute to the success of the 
enterprise, - and enjoy a lot of fun and 
fellowship in the process. The operative word 
is " involvement I" 


Masonry in Ontario already has a "shadow 
organization" in place i We have a central 
body, a district and the local unit (the 
lodge) . We have them in place, but there is 
no imperative impetus to bring them together 
in a cohesive whole. No systematic research 
has ever been undertaken to determine the 
attitudes and ideas of our members, or to 
gather the facts on the operation of our 


lodges, or to develop a statistical base on 
the condition of masonry across our 
jurisdiction. Such research would seem to be 
a very good starting place, - but the present 
structure would make it difficult to organize 
such studies. But there is a potential for 
making such a beginning I 

The Long Range Planning Committee did 
produce a very challenging report, 
sufficiently realistic to upset a few of our 
long- tenure senior people. It represented 
reforms that many thoughtful masons considered 
important and needed. It is asking for 
reform I Change is needed and inevitable, 
and the demand is developing a momentum of its 

Expansion of the L.R.P.C. to develop into 
something of a "research and development 
directorate", with subsidiary working groups 
in each district would seem to be a logical 
step. The organizing of a district agency in 
each district could create a permanent 
communications link which could be developed 
to perform specific tasks, and undertake 
particular research projects in the local area 
and across the province. 


The initial "research organization" with 
a branch in each district, equipped with 
appropriate terms of reference and clear 
objectives and authority to perform its 
mission can become an ongoing basis for 
development into a permanent part of the 
"masonic infra-structure." There may be some 
consitutional adjustments required, but such 
constraints need not be obstacles. 


Having taken the first step by creating a 
workable "research directorate" across the 
jurisdiction, and working to survey the lodges 
and masons generally to determine the facts 
and the opinions held, then reporting back on 
their findings, will be a good beginning. 
This crucial step can provide a statistical 
profile (a data base) and give insights into 
the real condition of masonry, - and may even 
suggest other enquiries and proposals. 

Maintaining the organization developed in 
each district on a continuing basis will make 
it possible to subsequently transform this 
into a permanent vehicle for reforming the 
district structure. Part of the initial 
research should be directed toward defining 
the new role of the district and developing a 
district support organization as a future 

It would seem desirable that reform of 
the district structure should include 
establishment of some authority and 
supervision over the several lodges in each 
district and enhance interaction between them. 

Accumulation of reseach, and building a 
permanent data base, using studies on 
statistics, attitudes, opinions and perceived 
needs at all levels will aid in the creation 
of policies and programs suitable for 
development, and provide the framework for 
implementing the product of such activity. 
Having constructed an organization, 
responsible to a central policy body, with 
feedback to and from the districts and their 
lodges, actively seeking the participation of 
ordinary lodge members can only result in 
increased activity at every level, and across 
the jurisdiction. 


Such a data base, with reciprocal 
information production and feed-back may be 
tied to a computer sustem at Grand Lodge for 
constant up-date and implementation. The use 
of a computer system is only a question of 
time, particularly with the expansion of 
information available as the result of the re- 
structuring process once it is initiated. 

Over time, then, these proposals offer a 
readily adaptable system of (communication, 
responsibility, program and project 
development and discipline across the 
jurisdiction. It has the advantage of using 
the existing framework, expanding its role, 
and making possible all sorts of possibilities 
as yet unforeseen. 


This presentation was begun by making a 
plea for reform of our Order and defining the 
nature of reform. There were also some 
remarks on the nature of masonry in general, 
an outline of our present structure, a 
dissertation on Project H*0*M*E and its 
meaning for us, stating that the 7% 
participation level ought to jar and shame us 
into reforml 

The plea for reform became more general 
and universal in application; in the process 
of offering ideas, we got caught up in the 
Long Range Planning Committee, which then 
seemed like a very good idea, but is now very 
much a lame duck after its efforts were 
largely side-tracked, edited and smothered 
into irrelevance. Which means "so much for 
trying to reform our Order by traditional 
means 1" 


We compared other organizations; a plan 
was offered to use our present structure more 
effectively. Again, it was emphasized that 
masonry in Ontario does not, - has not, and 
probably will not use our man-power resources 
efficiently and effectively unless shown how 
it may be done. But development of the 
structure discussion left some gaps, so 
following are some relevant figures. 

The first table indicates the decline of 
masonry in the last year. It is broken down 
by lodges and districts as well as the whole. 
The total number of lodges used were taken to 
be 648, as having been in existence in 1983 
and thus reflect changes. Analysis of the 
figures given in the 1984 Proceedings showed a 
few anomalies, but are taken to be reasonably 
accurate, plus or minus a little bit. 

So the gains and losses figures 
illustrate our dilemma. Masons are a very 
small part of the Ontario population, as 
probably would be expected. but why are we 
declining, when the male population is still 
growing? And population growth continues. 
Which indicates our general weakness as a body 
of influence; unable to attract young men in 
sufficient quantities to offset our losses, 
and we probably would be unwilling to let the 
younger generation into the higher levels of 
our Order until they are too old, grey and 
incapable of vision. 

Just to keep the record straight, let's 
look at some figures taken from the 1984 
Proceedings and other resources: 


Ontario Males, 20 year and older 3,973,000 
Ontario Masons 101,069 = 2% 

1983 to 1984 Lodge changes: 

Lodges with no membership gains 53 

Lodges with gains 143 + 425 

Lodges with losses 452 - 2642 

No. of Lodges 648 - 2217 

Net loss 

Of the 43 Masonic Districts only one (Grey) 
had a membership gain ( 3 ) . Not much to cheer 
about I 

Slow erosion year-by-year, lodge-by- 
lodge, district-by-district. Which points out 
something of the widespread perceptions held 
of the senior levels of our Order. Not only 
do we not gain much benefit from the man-power 
we have got, - - - we don't seem to get much 
feed-back or response from the "executive 
council" or Board of General Purpose of Grand 
Lodge. There is a common thread of various 
perceptions held in masonry which may not be 
valid, - but are held nonetheless. and 
foremost is one very widely held, that unless 
we have a very prominent man - don ' t try to 
run for the Board of General Purposes unless 
we can get support in the Toronto area, - we 
don't stand a chance, otherwise. And if we 
can't get our boy elected to the Grand Board, 

then our chances of getting a Grand Master 

are absolutely nill All because the 
Constitution was changed to require such 
election which still further limited the 
opportunity for participation within our 
Order . 


Growth of the Order peaked in the 
Fifties, but has begun a decline, not only in 
Craft lodges, but also in the Royal Arch and 
other appendant bodies. And at the same time 
as we decry all this, our Order is guilty of 
using only a tiny fraction of its talent, 
leaving many to seek other activity. At any 
rate, if we look at the "Masonic Executive" in 
Ontario, it would seem that the Board of 
General Purpose is also narrowly drawn: 

Board of General Purpose 20 

DDGM's (1 year) 43 

63 63 


By Virtue of Office (PGM'S) 11* 
Appointed 16 

Honorary 7 

3J 34 
*PGM'S elected to other office - 2 

Total 97 

As DDGM'S are less than full-time 
delegates to the Board and General Purposes, 
then there are only 20 active elected members 
on Board. With only 11 seats available each 
year for election (other than the GM & DGM) 
the influence of the elected members (33%) on 
Board policy can not be termed overwhelming. 
Which brings us to look at the source of our 

Voting Delegates to GL 1984 3928 

Total votes carried 4768 


Percent Beard to delegates = 

97 x 100 = 2.5% 

Percent elected Board = 

20 x 100 = 0.5% (1/2 of 1%) 

Again, the question of Board of General 
Purposes membership raised is really one of 
perception, - perhaps perception much more 
than of substance; nonetheless that perception 
is one of a tradition-bound and somewhat 
inbred group of dedicated and devoted brethren 
who are reluctant to embrace change, 
controversy and dissent. No such blanket 
statement can really be fair to all our fine 
fellows, but if there is a small kernel of 
truth in all this, then none of us should be 
reluctant to admit it, or to articulate it. 

The significant thread winding through 
all this is our preoccupation with ritual, 
and the self -limiting use of our manpower that 

results . It ought to be obvious 1 we 

just are not using our talent that is 
available! And we fail to use our manpower 
at all levels. In effect, - we have 
institutionalized apathy! We have made a 
virtue out of complacency and the status quo! 
We are underwhelmed by smug indifference. We 
have not given our people enough to do! We 
need a better way of using our bank account of 


At the Grand Master's Banquet in 1978 the 
excellent speaker was M. W. Bro. Jerry Rasor 


of Ohio, then Grand Master of the largest 
masonic jurisdiction in North America. Bro. 

Rasor said, "if Freemasonry is going to 

make strides in the future we've got to use 
imagination, innovation and invention to solve 
the problems which lie ahead." He added that 

if we do, we can change apathy to 

enthusiasm 1 We can change the negatives to 
positives! - and that is the Name of the Game I 

Among other pungent comments, Bro. Rasor 
reflected that in visiting a lodge he often 
sees a lot of grey heads, - indicating lots of 
experience and maturity: but if he sees few, 
if any, young men, he knows that such a lodge 
is in difficulty. 

The young men live in a different world 
today from we old guys, and we've got to do 
different, inventive and innovative things if 
we are going to interest such young men in not 
only becoming Freemasons, but in getting 
involved and taking an active role in the 


None of these proposals are definitive, 
earth-shattering or profound, and are, in a 
way, a continuation of an earlier effort by 
the writer. 

Over the years, one of the constant 
conditions observed in our lodges has been the 
fact that lodge attendance rarely amounts to 
more than a small fraction of the total 
membership, - regardless of lodge size or 
numbers of members. 

We have made no real effort to study 


these phenomena; no great effort to provide 
scope for increased activity by our members; 
no true challenges for expanded activity; - 
and certainly no channel for the ambitious to 
reach the supreme pinnacle of our Order. 

Does this mean that our Grand Lodge 
system of 2 year terms for all but the DDGM'S 
and the junior Grand Lodge chairs is cast in 
reinforced concrete? Does this mean that 
unless a brother is appointed a "cardinal" he 
can never be "Pope"? Does it mean that a 
body often referred to in conversation, - but 
not mentioned in our Book of Constitution, a 
group called the "Grand East" seems to have an 
influence of great power within our Order, 
and apparently beyond any challenge from the 
"swamp dwellers" I This body is cited, 
primarily due to the recurring appointments 
made to the Board, year-after-year-after-year 
of some faithful servants, - yet continuing to 
ignore the many talents that are "out there" 
in the distance. Does one have to be from 
Southern Ontario, - from the Toronto-Windsor- 
Kingston triangle to reach the top? 

Isn't it time that a good hard-nosed 
reassessment is made of how things are 
handled? Isn't it time we looked ahead as 
well as back? Isn't it time we began to use 
our talent to shout out to the world about our 
wonderful fraternity I? We ought to be 
excited enough to carry our message to a 
soured world bogged down in mediocrity, - make 
use of publicity and public relations 
techniques a little more recent than "the 
quill pen and the green eyeshade" and get on 
with itl 

There is only INERTIA standing between 
the only two possibilities we have: either 



So, brethern of Heritage Lodge, - we have 
a challenge to pursue. Imagination, 
innovation and invention are waiting for us to 
embrace them. We have to look at ourselves, 
research our system, and in the process get a 
lot of masons to help dig out the facts at all 
levels - at the lodge, - at the district, 
and at the pinnacle itself I 

Let us act as if we had fire in our 
bellies i Let's organize a continuing research 
program across our jurisdiction to define our 
problems. Then we will become a forum to 
propose policies for the future. Let us be 
sure of one thing, - and be absolutely clear 
on this very important point: We must be as 
committed to the future as we are appreciative 
of our past i " Let ' s look at those things we 
have been doing for 130 years, and not just 

stick to the "tried and true" I because 

they're not working too well just now. By all 
means let us measure our achievements. But 
let us use our talents in building our future. 

If we don't do it, who will? 

and as Jerry Rasor said at the end of 

his speech, quoting from the "My Fair Lady" 

song title "SHOW MEi - - and SHOW ME 




September 18, 1985 
V.W.Bro. Stewart Thurtell titled 
"Substance or Shadow? Masonry Today - 
and Maybe Tomorrow I 

FIRST REVIEW - was prepared by R.W.Bro. Carl 
Casselman, P.D.D.G.M., Georgian District, and 
read in lodge by R.W.Bro. Frank J. Bruce. 

Worshipful Master and Brethren: 

I must first express my humble apologies 
for not being present this evening in Heritage 
Number 730; but I do have two excellent 
reasons. We are celebrating our wedding 
anniversary and it is also the official visit 
of the District Deputy Grand Master to my 
Lodge. My absence will permit me to fulfill 
my family obligation by taking my wife to 
dinner, fulfill my masonic obligation by 
attending lodge, and through the gracious 
acceptance of R.R.Bro. Frank Bruce, have this 
review presented on my behalf. 

You are to be congratulated V. Wor. Bro. 
Thurtell for presenting a fine thought 
provoking paper on a topic in which I have had 
more than a passing interest for a number of 
years. The two subjects that you addressed 

(1) the decline in membership, and 

(2) the structural weakness within the 


You may recall that in the 1984 Grand 
Lodge proceedings, the Long Range Planning 
Committee studied declining membership and 
recorded twelve major points which contributed 
to SUCCESSFUL DODGES, These twelve points 
were condensed from a thirty-four point 
manifesto with input from a cross section of 
this Grand Jurisdiction. The key points that 
came through loud and clear were: 

(a) Successful lodges have become 
proficient in making their NEW members into 
practicing Freemasons who thoroughly 
understand our basic beliefs and are able to 
relate to them/ and 

(b) They offer a common meeting ground 
for men of goodwill to meet in an undisturbed 
atmosphere of mutal trust and understanding. 

I wholeheartedly agree with your 
statement that we are not using the manpower 
we have available. Consider the fact that 
each lodge has at its disposal several well 
qualified senior members who are inactive. We 
have all heard the statement made by a Past 
Master or a Past District Deputy Grand Master 
and I quote "I'm only a has been" or "I've 
been put out to pasture". These brethren 
could be brought back into the fold and put to 
work. Their talents and expertise can be 
utlized by encouraging them to assist the new 
Mason for at least a year following his 
admission to membership. This, of course, 
serves a two-fold purpose by: 

(1) activating the senior member, and 

(2) instructing the new initiate. 

With this program in place, perhaps we can 
generate a greater interest and awareness of 


our Craft in our new members and make our 
senior members active, participating Masons. 
We might then see a reversal in our declining 

A more equitable distribution of 
membership to the Board of General Purposes 
has been achieved during the past several 
years. Since our last Annual Communication of 
Grand Lodge the elected and appointed members 
of the Board represent twenty-six of the 
forty-three Districts in the Jurisdiction, or 
60% of the Districts are represented. You 
will agree that the Board of General Purposes 
now comprises a more equal distribution of 
membership and can therefore more readily 
reflect the wants and needs of the individual 

I am particularly interested in your 
comments regarding the Long Range Planning 
Committee. Its prime reasons for existance is 
to submit recommendations that will lead to 
measures designed to further the best 
interests of our beloved Craft. Several 
Districts have a Long Range Planning Committee 
in place and are meeting on a regular basis. 
The need for closer liaison and co-ordination 
is recognized and will be established between 
the various District Long Range Planning 
Committees and their Grand Lodge counterpart. 

Your suggestion of a research 
organization could come under the umbrella of 
the Long Range Planning Committee or perhaps 
the now expanded Condition of Masonry. A data 
collecting agency as you have outlined could 
provide valuable information on the effects of 
an ever changing society and its influence on 
our membership. The wants and needs of 
today's Mason are vastly different from those 


of fifty or even twenty-five-years ago. Have 
we kept pace with a changing society? If not, 
how can we fill the void that has contributed 
to our membership decline? 

In conclusion I would again congratulate 
you V.W.Bro. Thurtell on presenting an 
excellent paper which certainly meets the high 
standards expected in Heritage Lodge. You 
presented your point of view to invite 
controversy, active disagreement and 
articulate diaglogue. I'm confident that you 
have achieved your objective. 

SECOND REVIEW - was prepared by R.W.Bro. 
Donald R. Hall, P.D.D.G.M. , Frontenac District 
and read by R.W.Bro. David C. Bradley. 

Worshipful Master and Brethren: 

V.Wor.Bro. Thurtell outlines some reasons 
contributing to the decline of Masonic 
membership and offers suggestions which would 
aid in the strengthening of our organization. 

In summarizing the effects of the many 
facets of Masonry upon its members the author 
may have belaboured some points and may have 
placed too much emphasis on the H.O.M.E. 
project as an example of how Masons are 
neglecting their obligations. It appears that 
since this project originated in and was to be 
completed in the Toronto area, that those 
Brethren from a distance did not place it too 
high in their priorities, Why? project 
H.E.L.P. was very successful. Could this 
impetus have been, or be perpetuated? 

Possibly the author gives an answer to 


this question when he refers to the Long Range 
Planning Committee's report on the regional 
grouping of districts. He gives positive 
reactions to this report in a very convincing 
manner, to the extent that those who read his 
paper will be forced to re-study the L.R.P.C. 

Brother Thurtell touches on the success 
of service Clubs and although one may shudder 
to think that Masonic Lodges would become 
another Service Club, it should be observed 
that they are very successful in getting every 
member involved. Most Service Clubs have a 
vastly superior attendance record that Masonic 
Lodges do not have. 

The author gives adequate reasons why 
there should be some structural changes in 
Masonry and who should be involved in drawing 
up the suggestions for change. Will someone 
please listen to him? 

This is not the first paper with 
viewpoints about "Masonry Today" and it will 
not be the last. It calls for careful 
thinking followed by open minded discussion. 
Brother Thurtell 's paper should not be read 
and then shelved but rather it should 
stimulate thought, promote controversy, and 
lead to much needed change. Will those who 
can, listen and act? 

THIRD REVIEW - was prepared by R.W.Bro. Murray 
Wagg, P.D.D.G.M., Toronto, District 3 and read 
by R.W.Bro. Jack Pos. 

Worshipful Master and Brethren 


I must first thank R.W.Bro. Frank Bruce for the 
opportunity to review this thought-provoking 
paper, the main thrust of which I first became 
aware of as a member of the Long Range 
Planning Committee a couple of years ago. 

While Bro. Thurtell puts forward a very 
strong argument for reform, which I generally 
agree is required, his recommendation for a 
survey to determine the dimensions of our 
problems is to my mind the most salient and 
important point made, and should be followed 
through on without delay. I would suggest 
that all members be surveyed, i.e., active and 
inactive, demitted and suspended even though 
it may be difficult to differentiate between 
reasonable criticism and petty personal 
sniping. A question on lodge 
attendance/ involvement in years of strong, 
innovative exciting leadership versus dull, 
unimaginative leadership should be included. 

I personally feel that many of the things 
that Bro. Thurtell suggests are wrong with 
Masonry are what makes us different from other 
fraternal organizations, most of which are 
suffering from similar membership and 
attendance problems as well as that of who 
carried the load. It seems that very few 
people today want to make a commitment for 
more than a short period of time. This is the 
"me" generation which is supposed to be full 
of fun and excitement with little time left 
over for serious matters, and Masonry is, for 
the most part (initially at least), a serious 
matter. By the time men become Masons today, 
in their 30' s and 40* s, their lifestyles and 
priorities in their public and private 
avocations are already pretty firmly 
established; therefore, fewer members have 


time (or are willing to devote time) for 
involvement in Masonic activities. Perhaps 
more in depth investigating of applicants to 
make sure that at least some of our candidates 
have the qualifications of time and talent to 
be officers and/or committee members is the 
answer here. 

Bro. Thurtell cites the low response rate 
to Project H.O.M.E. as indicative of our level 
of activity, i.e. less than 7% across the 
jurisdiction. There is nothing unusual about 
this, Project H.E.L.P. received about the same 
kind of response, and the United Church of 
Canada's recently completed Ventures in 
Mission program reached its objective through 
the generosity of only a few of its members, 
less than 10% countrywise as I recall. 

Frank, I fear I have used up my allotment 
of 200 to 300 words for this review already, 
when much more could be said. Suffice it to 
say, I congratulate Stu Thurtell on his 
determination to stir up some thought and 
discussion (and hopefully action) on a subject 
of great concern to many of us, i.e. the 
revitalization of our beloved Order. 




V.W.Bro. Stuart Thurtell 

RESPONSE to R.W.Bro. Carl Casselman: 

In reference to the presentation 
statements concerning membership losses, 
reviewer then referred to the recent (1984) 
report of LRPC which grappled with this 
question; and whose response was to do a 
survey, from which came 12 attributes of the 
"Successful Lodge." To me, that's hardly an 
answer to the problem, - probably is really 
avoiding the problem, - and presents no 
overall or universal program to be implmented 
to stop the rot. Again, - there was no 
overall policy demonstrated, -nor any 
mechanism to demand action. In all 
likelihood, -the lodges which need help the 
most are those which have yet to hear of any 
such ideal 

In reference to my statement of "wasted 
manpower" Bro. Casselman made something of a 
plea for re-activating P.M's etc now "out-to- 
pasture" but while I agree with this, - I am 
much more conscious and concerned about all 
our wasted manpower resources, particularly 
among our general membership. Why does the 
vast majority of our general membership never 
attend? Lets ask them why? Also those 
suspended & demited ones. Here is some food 
for thought my Brethren. Last year ('84) our 
losses through death were almost exactly equal 
to our combined losses from dimits and 
suspensions. This ought to tell us something, 
for while there is little we can do to correct 
the effects of old age and infirmity, - surely 
there is some way of stemming our members 


making a choice to depart? 

My reviewer referred to the statement in 
'84 Proceedings that somehow the membership on 
the B of GP has become more equitable and 
representative in recent years, quoting the 
report that 26 districts of 43 have 
representation, 60% represented. Pardon my 
expletive-but "Balderdash!" Ihat statement is 
a snow jobl The fact is, the districts are a 
jerrymander; and not fairly divided or 
representative. With 650 lodges and 43 
districts the median should be 15.1 lodges per 
district; -but they vary from as few as 8 
lodges to as high as 26 lodges. It's no 
mystery why the outlying districts can't get 
their man elected, - as a 26 lodge district 
can sure outvote an 8 lodge district by better 
than 3 to 1, and the large city districts in 
combination have perpetuated this inequity. I 
was glad to see a small reference to this 
problem in the 1985 G.L. reports. 

Bro. Casselman's remarks on the LRPC are 
very well taken, but it is my view that the 
original concept that this committee work on a 
general overview of our jurisdiction and 
making concrete recommendations, but it's 
mandate has apparently been watered-down to 
deal in piecemeal fashion with a few specific 
concerns, -and not to make too many waves to 
upset "the way things are!" 

RESPONSE to R.W.Bro. Donald R. Hall. 

I generally agree with this response, and 
he has a somewhat valid point when he mentions 
that Project H.O.M.E, being situated in the 
immediate Toronto area should have more impact 


on the local masons than those far distant. 
That being said, -my district, Wilson District 
with 23 lodges with a little under a 7% 
response did a great deal better than, say, 
the 3 Hamilton Districts, or the two Niagara 
Districts which are a lot closer to Toronto. 
Again, it is my contention that this 
relatively low response indicates a general 
lack of support for universal programs, -and 
only a strong program with some real 
organization behind it can make any dents in 
the apathy. 


Bro. Wagg has hit the nail-on-the-head by 
recognizing the prime thrust of my paper is 
the desperate need to do the research across 
the entire jurisdiction to determine our 
problems, before any real reform can come 

Also Bro. Wagg seems to feel that the 
objects of my criticism in our masonry are 
those things which separate us from and make 
us unique from other organizations, - which 
uniqueness may or may not be a virtue. In 
this sense, I think Bro. Wagg may very well 
be right that other organizations may share 
similar problems, -but if some other groups 
have a common difficulty that we too share, 
it doesn't mean that we ought to just throw up 
our hands, and feel that there is nothing we 
can do I In fact, it is precisely because of 
the unique features in our masonry that I 
think we should be able to overcome most of 
these difficulties, with a good effort, good 
will and a tough-minded program which those 
other (need I say unfortunate) organizations 


cannot ma ten, due to our exclusive advantages. 
Advantages we have largely wasted by default, 
I think. 

Bro. Wagg was a bit "target specific" 
when he spoke of the "ME" generation. Yes, 
there's lots in what he says about the early 
70' s bunch - but our difficulties go back to 
those of us in our 40' s ; 50' s and 60* s - and 
have been so for years and years 1 I can't 
really get too excited over the current crop 
and our lack of ability to attract and hold 
them. That could be the subject of a very 
good study group 1 I am really saying, I 
expect, that if we don't get off our sterns, 
and get some push going, -there may not be too 
much we can do - the whole 7,000 of us active 
masons, - as compared with the fantasy figures 
given in the annual proceedings. 

With reference to Bro. Wagg comparing of 
the 7% response figure in Project H*0*M*E that 
I have cited to the 10% contribution level in 
the United Church's missionary canpaign, -I 
don't believe the circumstances are at all 
comparable. In fact, my cited response figure 
of 7%, remember, was based on the response in 
one of the better performing districts, and a 
few of them, like Brant, or the two London 
districts shouldn't feel too doggone 
complacent. So, the 7% is not the problem, - 
its a symptom of a problem to which we can 
only guess at the dimensions, of which we'll 
have to find out through research, - I hope I 

Bro. Wagg made some marginal notes on my 
script, and I must say they were pungent and 
penetrating. I'm only sorry that I am unable 
to go over them with you. I will share the 
comment he made that in the development of our 
masonry we don't need a vast bureaucratic 


horde, and I agree there is no virtue in 
needless complications and mindless petty 
details. I think we both agree that there 
ought to be some way of getting a useful 
development initiated in any one district put 
into some sort of a package by some central 
coordinating body and then getting it out to 
the other districts, - and if it really has 
some valid promise, -giving the poor and 
isolated District Deputy some clout to force 
compliance among his lodges. Otherwise, - 
nothing will happen, -and nothing will change. 

That last statement may prove to be the 
epitaph of our masonry unless we get going. 


R.W.Bro. Wallace E. McLeod. 

Brother Thurtell, your zeal for the 
Institution of Freemasonry your exertion on 
its behalf are well known to all of us, your 
paper this evening breaks new ground for The 
Heritage Lodge and marks a radical departure 
from the historical studies that have been our 
standard fare in the past. The quest for 
truth takes many forms and it seems that there 
is never a solution to real problems. The old 
familiar story reminds us that the first step 
in persuading a mule to do what you want is to 
get its attention by hitting it over the head 
with a two by four. 

Perhaps the way to get the attention of 
masonic authorities is to tread on a few toes, 
well brother Thurtell this evening you have 
gone down a pathway paved with toes; its a 
risky business, that is how I got my blood 
spattered all over the rug, for a while at 
least. Don't turn your back, you have given 
us food for thought and that is good. Of 
course it will never do to let you 
imaginatively agree with everything that was 
said. For example, you and your critics all 
have fine things to say about the Long Range 
Planning Committee, in my opinion the L.R.P.C. 
has done almost as much as some of our Past 
Grand Masters to destroy the effectiveness of 
the Board of General Purposes, but let that 

The important thing is to get our 
thoughts out in the open and start people 


thinking about them. We are all locked into 
the bureaucratic mind that says there are only 
two rules: 

First, when in doubt mumble 
Second, when in doubt, get pressed, 
say no. 

Our reaction no I no I we can't do that, 
that is tampering with the 'landmarks'. 
We'll, keep on the way we are and we will 
have no one to follow the plow from one 
landmark to the next. 

Brother Thurtell, on behalf of all of us, 
I am priviledged to express our gratitude for 
sharing your concerns with us and for jolting 
us out of our complacency with those 
provocative statements, Thank you. 



For Freemasonry in Ontario 

R.W.Bro. Jacob (Jack) Pos 

Many progressive masons have frequently 
expressed concerns regarding the aims and 
objectives of Freemasonry and its 
contributions to modern society. There are 
those who feel the Craft has not kept pace 
with the times nor adjusted to the marvels of 
communication and technology; while others 
have expressed real concern for declining 
numbers and apparent apathy in certain aspects 
of our Fraternity. 

We have all heard it before, and no 
matter what changes may be implemented, we 
will probably here it again; therefore any 
proposed changes for improvement should not 
come about by an erosion or alteration of the 
basic tenents and principles upon which the 
Fraternity has been founded. 

The Long Range Planning Committee, in its 
original mandate, put forth 12 important 

*The original proposal was submitted to the 
Chairman, R.W.Bro. H.O. Polk (now P.G.M. ) of 
the Long Range Planning Committee, July 28th, 
1980; some of the information was used by Bro. 
Pos in commenting on Bro. Thurtell's paper 
version was prepared by the Author in response 
to a motion passed in Lodge at the Regular 
Meeting, September 18, 1985. 


issues for comment from the membership at 
large. The following proposals were 
originally offered as suggestions for 
discussion by the committee, and deal 
primarily with one issue "The Organization of 
Grand Lodge' although 'Regalia' and 'Board 
Representation' are also touched upon. 

My first concern stemmed from an uneasy 
awareness that appeared to predominate 
frequent discussions with senior members of 
the Craft, who were of the opinion that the 
organization of the Grand Lodge, which 
appeared to be democratic in structure and 
intent, had over the years evolved into 
something much more autocratic. 

A typical example relates to the early 
development of our first 'Historical Lodge'. 
An attempt was made to obtain an audience with 
the Board of General Purposes to discuss the 
possibilities of Instituting a Historical 
Research Lodge in Ontario. The initial 
approach was made through normal channels by 
first contacting the D.D.G.M. We were 
subsequently, informally advised to discuss 
the proposal with a number of Past Grand 

Eventually, I was invited to appear 
before a meeting of the "Grand East", in the 
Boardroom of the Memorial Building in 
Hamilton, Tuesday afternoon, 2:00 p.m. sharp, 
November 23, 1976. Those present consisted of 
the Grand Secretary, Deputy Grand Master and 5 
Past Grand Masters. A package of information, 
containing organizational material, minutes of 
meetings, aims and objectives and alternative 
proposals, was mailed to all Past Grand 
Masters prior to the meeting. A very lengthy, 
negative letter was received from a Past Grand 


Secretary, and we never did receive an 
audience with the Board of General Purposes. 

Nevertheless, our determination and 
patience was rewarded, as history records, The 
Heritage Lodge No. 730 was eventually 
Constituted on September 23rd, 1978, by 
M.W.Bro. R.E. Davies, G.M., assisted by the 
Grand Secretary M.W.Bro. J. Irvine and the 
Officers of Grand Lodge. But the governing 
process remained unchanged, major decisions 
affecting Freemasonry in Ontario, were still 
being made by a body of senior masons who were 
not officially constituted, even in the newly 
revised Constitution of 1980. The situation 
came about through a process of evolution over 
a number of years perhaps by necessity and in 
the interest of efficiency and expediency. 

In the beginning, it may have seemed 
unimportant to call a full meeting of the 
Board for an urgent matter but of minor 
significance, deeming it convenient and 
efficient to make a decision in the Grand 
Lodge Office with the assistance of the Grand 
Secretary and one or more Past Grand Masters 
who may perchance have been present at the 
time. Of course the Board was informed of the 
action taken at the earliest convenience. 
Speculating further, one would assume that 
over the years, the minor decisions would take 
on major proportions and the chance visits of 
P.G. Ms. had eventually become scheduled 
meetings of the "Grand East" rendering the 
Board of General Purposes redundant except for 
a number of routine administative 
' housekeeping ' r espons ibi 1 i t i es . 

The following recommendations were 
prompted in some measure as a response to the 
conditions that prevailed at the time, and a 


concern for a more 'grass roots' involvement 
of more masons working for the benefit of 
Craft. From our experiences in Waterloo and 
Wellington Districts, the most important 
ingredient for the success of all our 
undertakings has been 'maximum participation*. 
In the production of the play "The Birth of 
our Grand Lodge" no fewer than 70 masons were 
involved on a voluntary basis contributing 
much time and effort for a single 
presentation. The Brethren worked very hard 
to make it successful and enjoyed their work 
because it had a purpose with clearly defined 
goals. Another example, that involved the 
entire Jurisdiction was the H.E.L.P. project; 
over 645 active participants from each lodge 
plus the overall organizing committee made it 
possible to more than double the original 
target figure of 300,000. And more recently, 
The Heritage Lodge raised more than $130,000 
for the restoration of a pre-confederation 
Lodge Room in the Black Creek Pioneer Village. 
Of course an important and essential catalyst 
is strong and dynamic leadership. 

Freemasonry came to North America under 
the leadership of their respective mother 
Grand Lodge. Constituent Lodges in Upper and 
Lower Canada were warranted by the Grand 
Lodges of England, Ireland and Scotland. When 
a number of like lodges were established, they 
organized themselves into Provincial Grand 
Lodges. The first Provincial Grand Lodge in 
Upper Canada was formed at Niagara in 1792, 
with R.W.Bro. Wm. Jarvis as Provincial Grand 
Master. Other Provincial Grand Lodges had 
been formed and were being formed throughout 
the British Commonwealth and in Europe. Hence 
the concept of subordinate Grand Lodges under 
a specific Grand Lodge in the same country is 
not new and had its beginnings even before our 


own Grand Lodge was formed in 1855. 

In New Zealand for example, with a total 
civilian population equivalent to that of 
Metropolitan Toronto, there are approximately 
40,000 masons registered in the Grand Lodge of 
New Zealand which is comprised of 13 regions 
or masonic districts. Each masonic geographic 
unit is governed by a Provincial Grand Master 
with the title of Right Worshipful Brother. 
In the organization of Grand Lodge, the 
Provincial Grand Masters are third in rank 
following the Most Worshipful the Grand Master 
and Right Worshipful the Deputy Grand Master. 
There are no District Deputy Grand Masters. 

Having spent a year in the South Island 
from 1973 to 1974 and affiliated with two 
Lodges with the priviledge of attending the 
Annual Communication of the Grand Lodge, I 
became somewhat familiar with the structure of 
the masonic region designated as Canterbury 
Province; the other 12 regions were designated 
as Districts each with a unique geographic 
prefix such as Auckland District and Otago 

Canterbury Province has three levels of 
authority; first the 59 Craft Lodges each 
operating within its own geographic boundary, 
but with co— joint jurisdiction through a 
regional masonic bureau, second the Provincial 
Grand Lodge with its own compliment of Grand 
Lodge Officers whjich provides leadership and 
is in charge of the Annual Installation and 
Investiture Ceremonies, with assistance 
from the Craft Lodges, for each of the 59 
Lodges in the region; and third the Grand 
Lodge of New Zealand. Following the work of 
the evening and before closing the lodge, 
Grand Lodge Officers are ceremonially retired, 


then the Provincial Grand Lodge Officers are 
permitted to retire. The reverse order is 
followed when opening the Lodge. In addition, 
there are still a number of lodges in 
Canterbury Province and other Masonic 
Districts that are operating under warrants 
from the Grand Lodges of Scotland, Ireland and 
England that inter-visit regularly. 


The proposal for a Provincial Grand Lodge 
under the Grand Lodge of Canada in the 
Province of Ontario is not a new innovation in 
Freemasonry, but simply a revival of a 
procedure that historically has always been a 
part of our system. 

The word 'Province' in this sense meaning 
a geographic unit of a larger jurisdiction. 
Essentially, the Jurisdiction of the Grand 
Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario 
would be divided into several geographic units 
or Provinces. The actual number would have to 
be properly researched to provide the most 
equitable and harmonious distribution. For 
the purpose of explanation and to invite 
discussion, I have chosen the basic masonic 
ruling number of three although holding it to 
five or expanding to a perfect seven are other 
considerations . 

Using the statistics from the current 
(1985) Grand Lodge Proceedings, and 
arbitrarily assigning names for the three 
geographic units, an equitable distribution 
from west to east might appear as follows: 









London East 

London West 

North Huron 

St. Thomas 


South Huron 





Totals 14 

































Hamilton A 

Hamilton B 

Hamilton C 

Niagara A 

Niagara B 













































Algoma East 




Muskoka-Parry Sound 

Nipissing East 


Ottawa 1 

Ottawa 2 


Prince Edward 

St. Lawrence 

Sudbury-Mani toulin 



Totals 16 

Grand Totals 43 








































(Fraternal Reviews, 1985) 









British Columbia 






New Brunswick 



New Foundland* 

Nova Scotia (1983) 






Prince Edward 

Island (1983) 










*New Foundland operates as a Provincial 
Lodge under the Grand Lodge of England. 


Each of the three proposed Provincial 
Grand Lodges in the Province of Ontario has 
more than double the total number of masons in 
each of the other Grand Lodges in Canada. 
Also, the Grand Lodge in the Province of 
Prince Edward Island has approximately the 
same total number of masons as each of the 
seven smallest Districts of our current Grand 

Of the 27 Grand Lodges reported in the 
Fraternal Reviews (Grand Lodge Proceedings, 
1985), 11 of them or more than 40% have fewer 
members than the smallest of the 3 proposed 
Provincial Grand Lodges, which may give 
justification for more than the 3 Provincial 
Grand Lodges initially proposed. 



R.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Master 
R.W.Bro. the Deputy Provincial Grand 

Masters (15) 
R.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Senior Warden 
R.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Junior Warden 
V.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Chaplain 
V.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Treasurer 
V.W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Secretary 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Registrar 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Senior Deacon 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Junior Deacon 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Super in tendant 

of Works 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Director of 

W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Sword Bearer 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Organist 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Pursuivant 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Historian 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Tyler 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Stewards (6) 
W.Bro. the Provincial Grand Standard 
Bearers (2) 

This would also allow greater opportunity 
for more participation by opening 25 or more 
new positions (the present D. D.G.Ms, would 
become D. P. G.Ms) for each proposed Provincial 
Grand Lodge. Normally there would be over 200 
Worshipful Masters installed each year in each 
of the three proposed regions and 
approximately the same number of I.P.Ms are 
subsequently added to the list of Past 
Masters; therefore, there should be an 
abundance of talent available to adequately 
fill the new positions proposed for each 
Provincial Grand Lodge. 


There are those who would suggest that 
the proposal merely introduces another level 
of administration which would compound the 
present bureaucracy , and further decrease the 
efficiency of a central administration. My 
personal response is that our present system 
has not kept pace with advancing technologies 
in rapid data collection, assimilation, 
storage, retrieval and dissemination. The 
current postal system in causing long and 
costly delays in written communications, and 
our own central administration is apparently 
becoming more remote from the grass-roots of 

Even if there should be, perchance, some 
minor duplication in procedure, it would be a 
small price to pay for the long term benefits 
of a more efficient computerized network 
system. The rapid advances, greater capacity 
and reduced costs in the home and small 
business computer market has made affordable 
network systems available to all. 

Such a system, initially, could connect 
the permanent offices of the three Provincial 
Grand Lodges to the Grand Lodge Office in the 
Masonic Memorial Building in Hamilton by high 
speed and error free optic transmissions, and 
eventually, by portable or desk top units to 
each district in the Grand Jurisdiction. 

Also, this could give individual lodges 
within the districts, by means of coded 
passwords, ready access at all times to 
available information and to allow the 
immediate transfer of data, semi-annual 
returns, reports and special requests; thereby 
providing a more direct and expedient link 
between the basic component of our structural 
organization and its governing bodies. 


Should the formation of three Provincial 
Grand Lodges become a reality, then 
conceivably, London, Toronto and Ottawa could 
become the Masonic Capitals of their 
respective Regions. Further, if on the 
average, each mason in each Region were to 
loan or donate an average of $25.00 per year 
for 5 years, then over 4 million dollars would 
be available to commence construction of a new 
Masonic Building or Appropriate Facility in 
each of the three Masonic Capitals. 

Hopefully, each beautifully architectured 
structure would include space and facilities 
not only for essential lodge meeting rooms, 
but also for major social events as well as a 
regional library and museum. The mistake 
should not be made of building a single 
purpose building, such as the Masonic Temple 
at 888 Yonge St., Toronto, or the Masonic 
Temple at 2295 St. Mark St., Montreal; but 
rather a multi-use, income producing structure 
perhaps connected with a large business 
complex, convention center, shopping mall, 
hotel or apartments with ample parking 
facilities, so as not to impose a financial 
burden to future generations of masons. 


The jewels of office should be the same 
as those of Grand Lodge and its Constituent 
Lodges; but the collars and aprons should be a 
distinctive colour and design appropriate for 
the Provincial Grand Lodge. They should be 
simple in design, and not as elaborately 
ornamented as the regalia of Grand Lodge. 

Manufacturers of masonic regalia have, 


over the years, made it much too pretentious 
and costly, particularly the Grand Lodge 
regalia. By staying with the Craft Lodge 
apron of a Past Master and simply replacing 
the blue satin border with a similar border of 
a different colour and adding a cotton 
embroidered office symbol in the center of the 
apron should be adequate. The cost of 
converting a Past Master's apron would be very 
reasonable and the standard carrying case 
could still be used. 

If a collar and jewel is required, then a 
plain soft collar, similar to the border of 
the apron is sufficient. It could befolded 
flat and carried in the apron case. The 
distinction between current rank and past rank 
is that the former wear the collar and jewel, 
which is passed on to their successor and 
remains the property of the Provincial Grand 
Lodge (which is the practice in Craft lodges), 
and the latter would continue to wear the 
apron only. 

This would be an interesting assignment 
and challenge for a new Committee to be styled 
'The Regalia Committee' which would also 
continue to watch over the needs of our 
Fraternity and police the manufacturers. This 
would also remove the resposnibility from the 
manufacturers and place it back in the hands 
of the Fraternity where it belongs. 


I have purposely left this subject to the 
last so that it can be tied in with 
recommenations for changes to the present 
organization of Grand Lodge. To avoid 
confusion between the administrative structure 


of the two bodies, I shall refer to the 
general meeting of Grand Lodge as the 
Provincial body as the PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE 
CONVENTION. The governing bodies shall be 
identified as the BOARD OF GENERAL PURPOSES 
(Grand Lodge) and GOVERNING COUNCIL 
(Provincial Grand Lodge) . 


A 'Provincial Grand Lodge Convention' 
would be held every two years (alternating 
with the Communication of Grand Lodge), at 
which time the Provincial Grand Lodge Officers 
with the exception of the Deputy Provincial 
Grand Masters, would be elected by written 
ballot after declared and approved nominations 
have been publicized in much the same manner 
as in the present Constitution for Grand 
Lodge. Provincial Grand Lodge Officers would 
be Installed and Invested and hold office for 
two years. Vacancies would be filled by 
appointment until the next regular election. 
The Deputy Provincial Grand Masters would be 
elected within their respective Districts not 
less than 60 days before the Provincial Grand 
Lodge Convention. 

The composition of the 'Governing 
Council' shall include one representative from 
each masonic district within the Provincial 
Region plus 5 additional members appointed by 
the Provincial Grand Master. In addition, 
certain designated offices of the Provincial 
Grand Lodge shall also be members of the 
Governing Council. A voting majority of the 
seats should be with the District 
Representatives in order to insure a grass 
roots system of government. Half of the 


District Representatives should be elected 
every year and serve for a two year term. 
District Representatives may be re-elected and 
other members of the Governing Council may be 
re-appointed. No person can serve more than 
three consecutive terms unless by virtue of an 
elected office in the Provincial Grand Lodge. 

District Representatives would be elected 
by secret ballot at a Regular District 
Meeting, properly publicized to every mason, 
within the District through the Lodge 
Secretaries at least 14 days prior to the 
meeting at which the ballot is to be taken. 
This will also apply to the election of the 
Deputy Provincial Grand Master every other 
year. The results of the election are to be 
transmitted, in a prescribed manner and 
verified by the District Chairman or 
President, to the office of the Provincial 
Grand Secretary at least 6 weeks prior to the 
date of the Provincial Grand Lodge Convention. 

Standing and appointed committees, which 
are necessary for the operation, maintenance 
and future planning of the Provincial Grand 
Lodge, shall be responsible to the Governing 
Council. The Chairman of each such committee 
shall be a member of the Governing Council; 
non council members may be added to certain 
committees with the approval of the Governing 

By-Laws or Letters Patent for the 
Provincial Grand Lodge would have to be 
drafted outlining the structure of the 
Provincial Grand Lodge, election, appointment, 
duties and responsibilities of Officers and 
Committees; types, frequency and dates or 
times of meetings; and other matters relevant 
to the operation and maintenance of the 


Provincial Grand Lodge; and that it fully 
acknowledges the supremecy of the Grand Lodge 
A.F. & A.M. of Canada, in the Province of 
Ontario and, will at all times pay due respect 
and obedience to its laws, rules and 
regulations. That is, assuming that the 
Constitution of Grand Lodge has been 
restructured and amended to provide for the 
formation and operation of Provincial Grand 


Much of what has been suggested thus far 
concerning organization, regalia and 
government applies to Grand Lodge as well. 
However, if a revised structure should permit 
the formation of Provincial Grand Lodges, then 
much of the cost of administration will have 
to be transfered to the Provincial Regions 7 
and the current procedure of semi-annual 
returns to the Grand Lodge will not be 
necessary, as the Craft Lodges will be 
reporting directly to the Provincial Grand 
Lodge, with the latter submitting returns to 
the Grand Lodge on an annual basis. 
Therefore, the present fee structure will have 
to be modified accordingly. 

At current operating costs (which may 
have to be adjusted upward to accommodate the 
new proposal), each Lodge may be required to 
contribute $1.50 per member with their semi- 
annual returns to the office of the Provincial 
Grand Lodge of which approximately 75 cents 
would be retained, and the balance of $1.50 on 
an annual basis, would be paid to the Grand 
Lodge with the annual report. A less 
desirable alternative or temporary arrangement 
would have the individual Lodges reporting 


direct to the Grand Lodge, as is the current 
practice, and grants paid on a per capita 
basis to the Provincial Grand Lodges. 
However, while this may be a simple and 
expedient transition, it would usurp authority 
from the Provincial Grand Lodge and not be in 
the best interests of the Craft in the long 

Grand Lodge would continue to administer 
the major charitable and benevolent activites 
of the Craft, ensure uniformity of the work, 
approve design of regalia and administrative 
procedures, adjudicate grievances and appeals, 
and provide the necessary leadership for the 
welfare of the Craft in Ontario. All matters 
concerning Freemasonry with other Grand Lodges 
throughout the world will continue to be 
processed through the office of Grand Lodge. 

The unofficial concept of the 'Grand 
East' can be made to serve a very useful 
purpose. The combined experiences of the Past 
Grand Masters should be exploited for the 
benefit of Freemasons in general and in 
particular for special assignments. They 
should be legally constituted, and styled 
somewhat after the Senate in the Federal 
Government and perhaps designated the 
Senatorial Board, but without veto power. 

The major activities and principal 
support for the Grand Master should reside 
with the Board of General Purposes. The 
composition of the 'Board' should include 
elected representatives from the Provincial 
Grand Lodges who should control the majority 
of the votes. Other members would include 
appointments by the Grand Master and certain 
designated offices of Grand Lodge; for 
example; the Deputy Grand Master as Chairman 


or President and the Grand Secretary as 
Secretary of the Board. 

Half of the Provincial Grand Lodge 
Representatives should be elected each year 
and hold office for 2 years. Members of the 
Board may be re-elected and/or re-appointed, 
but may not serve more than three consecutive 
terms except by virtue of being elected to a 
designated office in Grand Lodge. 

The foregoing proposals and comments are 
presented, not as a criticism of our present 
operational procedure which from its original 
conception over 250 years has served a very 
useful purpose, but simply as suggestions to 
add further refinement to our present system. 
While these proposals may appear to depart 
from established custom the precedents have 
been well established, although they have not 
been used in recent years. 

It was necessary to introduce some 
specific details purely for illustrative 
purposes, they are not engraved in stone and 
can be modified easily to accommodate changing 
circumstances. The primary objective of this 
presentation is to outline a general 
philosophy for further discussion. Should any 
of these suggestions receive general support, 
then more serious work will be required to 
finalize the details and test the reactions. 
Nevertheless, a fresh approach has been 
outlined with the hope of re-activating the 
interest of individual masons and perhaps 
attracting new members. 

Respectfully submitted 
R.W.Bro. J. Pos. 



An assessment of Freemasonry* 
Bro. The Hon. John R. Matheson Q.C. 

"God Himself hopes for and in man; has 
placed His eternal hope in man's hands, and 
given to him, along with the gift of liberty, 
the terrible power of frustrating or achieving 
the purposes of Divine Love." 



This is an attempt on the part of a 
longtime backbencher to assess the very 
essence of freemasonry. I have no particular 
axe to grind nor authority to defend. For 
over forty-five years I have rejoiced in 
fraternal companionship, watching far better 
artisans than I do the ritualistic work and 
make all important decisions whereby masons 
govern the Craft. 

*Paper presented at the Second Annual Heritage 
Banquet of The Heritage Lodge, held in the 
Visitors Centre, Black Creek Pioneer Village, 
Toronto, January 30th, 1986. 


In SPIRITUS MUNDI Northrop Frye opens 
with a chapter he entitled "The Search for 
Acceptable Words" , which expresses my anxious 
state of mind in exposing my ingenious 
cogitations before such an elitist audience. 
I take guarded comfort in Dr. Frye's assurance 
that every creative person possesses some 
useful interconnected body of images and ideas 
underneath consciousness which it is his duty 
to fish up from time to time. 

Should I apologise for suggesting that I 
may be creative? The mason knows that behind 
all things is a Divine Architect who made all 
things good, even myself. He made Man in his 
own image , that is in the image of an artist. 
As an intimate fellowship "we are fond 
together", as T.E. Lawrence once phrased it, 
precisely because freemasons feel under no 
compulsion to agree. I know in charity you 
will hear me out, and then accept or reject 
whatever I say without hating me for it. Or 
better still you will ponder my metaphors, and 
then develop them into something much more 
finished and worthy of your own. 

So, the wind from my lips bloweth where 
it listeth, and I will not dare to predict 
whither it goeth. In deep appreciation of 
your incomparable kindness in inviting me, I 
venture forth. 

What I presume to offer as my 
understanding of masonry is garnered as much 
from non-masonic sources as from anything I 
have learned in lodge. My authorities tend to 
be blurred. Much of the stimulating and 
substantial masonic scholarship today comes 
from persons outside of our recognized 
obediences, and, indeed, from non-masons who 
are predisposed to masonic lore and 



One is mindful of the naughty inscription 
over Marischal College in Aberdeen, "They say, 
What say they? Let them sayl" Such a posture 
would be sheer affectation. We masons, 
coveting "the tongue of good report", do care 
what writers say about us. 

Recognizing that freemasonry is not 
homogeneous, that it derives from ancient 
learning, as well as from many diverse 
traditions, is it possible to discover what is 
essential and fundamental in its philosophy, - 
to probe its raison d'etre.? 

Masonry is founded upon confidence in the 
dignity of Man. Its monumental contribution 
to western civilization results from a fierce 
attachment to liberty and to individual 
conscience. We see here the classic 
Aristotelian balance, freedom and control. 

Despite all the heroic affirmations on 
human rights and freedoms, as he approaches 
the 21st Century, modern man is less than sure 
that he enjoys any meaningful degree of 
choice. He has come to believe that freedom 
is more a cherished theory than reality. The 
behavioural sciences suggest mankind is 
governed less by moral judgement and will, and 
more by the dictates of powerful internal and 
external forces, - genetic , psychological, 
environmental, economic and military. 

Many young people despair of any real 
measure of freedom. 

Two determinist theories, Freudian and 
Marxist, dominate the thinking of this world. 
Both are inimical to the idea of freedom or 


its concomitant, personal moral 
responsibility. True freedom cannot survive 
without moral ity, and morality itself 
presupposes freedom. Without choice the word 
virtue has no relevance or meaning. 

The initiate to the Craft learns that 
freemasonry rests upon the practice of social 
and moral virtue. He is invested with an 
apron as a badge of innocence to symbolize 
purity of life, that he may stand finally 
before his Maker undef iled by vice or sin. 
Masonry, a system of ethics based upon freedom 
and upon personal moral responsibility, is an 
anomaly in our time. Freemasonry has been 
characterized as "the religion of the 
enlightenment ,, . Out of the brooding mysticism 
of the dark ages emerges the awareness that 
man is master of his own destiny, capable of 
controlling the world and its government. Our 
brother Giuseppe Mazzini, whom the British 
historian Trevelyan described as "the noblest 
of the many exiles then sheltering in our 
island", caught the masonic vision of the 
portion of mankind in his dramatic phrase, 

"One sole God; 
One sole ruler, - his Law; 
One sole interpreter of the law - 
Humanity. " 

The importance of freedom is inherent in 
the allegory of a Great Architect, who, Dr. 
James Anderson told us, "created all things 
very good, and according to Geometry, last of 
all formed Adam after his own image..." Once 
having created the earth the Architect placed 
Man in charge leaden with large and onerous 
responsibilities. He was left free but with 
accountabi 1 i ty . 


The motto of the Right Honourable Roland 
Michener is "libre et ordonne", free and 
bound. The mason treasures his right to think 
for himself and believe what he will. And the 
mason is bound, - by the strictest demands of 
moral conduct. 

My home lodge is True Britons Lodge #14. 
In perusing the early minutes and proceedings 
I have been intrigued with the number of 
charges, reprimands, warnings and apologies 
that appear during 1819 and throughout the 
1820s relating to unacceptable behaviour. If 
a brother failed to measure up to the masonic 
expectations, even within the precincts of his 
own home, the brethern were zealous to 
investigate, to admonish, "to place him under 
censure until he should find grace", and 
finally, if he did not shape up and repair his 
ways, to expel him from the lodge. 

Returning to our medieval beginnings, 
Professor Durant tells us that in every city 
in western Europe there were established 
meeting places where men of different social 
occupations and social classes, different 
religious persuasions, different political 
opinions, even different nationalities could 
meet in goodwill and exchange ideas. Under 
the "cloak of secrecy" and oath of 
confidentiality men felt free to congregate 
and discover the wonder of one another. In a 
society demanding a greaat deal of conformity 
this freedom to communicate was tremendously 
exciting. Security for this intercourse 
depended upon secrecy. 

Not an end in itself, secrecy was the 
best means that our early brothers had to 
protect a climate of unconstraint. 


A large part of the fascination of 
freemasonry was in the variety of interchange 
that it afforded. Freedom is well on its way 
when man realizes that he has much to learn 
from his brother, that all that he can ever 
hope to see from his own small window is an 
infinitesimal part of the whole. 

What relationship pertains between 
freemasonry and religion? Religion may be 
defined as the belief in a God, and in 
particular a personal God, and in faith and 
worship. It is paradoxical that masonry, a 
system of morality, has counted among its most 
ardent enemies many of the good people. Eric 
Hoffer characterizes those of any fanatical 
faith as "the true believers". These include 
devout people of rigid and crystallized 
religious convictions. 

Perhaps this is not surprising. Some men 
of God sincerely oppose the Craft on doctrinal 
grounds. If one is certain that he possesses 
"the true milk of the word", why get 
contaminated by those who do not? "Be ye not 
unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what 
fellowship hath righteousness with 
unrighteousness? and what communion hath light 
with darkness?" 

And some clergy, of broader view, believe 
that too many masons make lodge their church 
and thereby escape the discipline of regular 
worship and stewardship. One Presbyterian 
minister stated this to me a few days ago. I 
tried, unsuccessfully, to persuade him that 
lodge and church were mutually supportive, 
that masonry may be regarded as "the 
handmaiden to religion." 

But, do they sometimes crowd one another 


on the same road? Religion is essentially a 
belief in a Supreme Being. Masonry is in 
accord. Religion is concerned with ethical 
conduct. Masonry is a system of morality. 
Religion promises eternal life. Masonry is 
preoccupied with the journey of life as 
preparation for the ultimate adventure of 
dying, - what our French friends refer to as a 
passage from light, to darkness, to greater 
light. They call it "Renaissance". Would 
freemasonry not constitute at least some near 
form of higher religion? 

Freemasonry is far more threatening to 
those of the faithful whose belief system is 
ultra orthodox. The Roman Catholic who is 
convinced that all others are destined for 
hell, the "born again" Protestant with 
certitude of scripture, the fanatic Muslim or 
Hasidic Jew, - all these devout people are 
simply not masonic material. Even some 
Anglican, Lutheran and Methodist leaders in 
recent years have voiced strong opposition to 
masonry. We, who revere the Royal Family, are 
much saddened by the Queen Mother's 
unsympathetic view of the Craft based, we are 
given to believe, upon religious qualms. 

Some people are distressed by any theological 

As I was preparing this paper, whose 
primary theme is freedom, I chanced to catch 
on television a passionate appeal for funds to 
endow a new American Protestant university. 
It was to be "The Notre Dame of 
Fundamentalism". The object was to ensure 
that the true Christian believer was no second 
class citizen; that, equipped with all 
requisite higher degrees, he might enter the 
portals of power and remake America. The 


evangelist, who promoted this fifty million 
dollar appeal, promised that the faculty would 
be screened to ensure that no person would 
teach at LIBERTY UNIVERSITY who did not 
believe that the Bible was infallible, that 
Christ was God, and in free enterprise. 

He promised there would be no security of 
tenure lest some professor turned out to be a 
liberal. Every teacher and every student 
allowed at LIBERTY must be a born-again 

Tom Paine once despaired that all 
religions, though in their nature kind and 
benign, tended in the fullness of time to lose 
their native mildness and become morose and 

In discussing the dialectic of belief and 
vision, Northrop Frye recently distinguished 
between faith and "professed faith". He 
considered words signifiying belief as of 
negligible value; faith in God and brother man 
could be expressed only in action. 

A century ago the works of John Rusk in 
were familiar to almost anyone of cultivated 
taste. He had the insight and spirit of a 
speculative mason. In an address to The Royal 
Institute of British Architects in 1865, he 
spoke of superstition and religion in words 
that bear repeating today: 

"Let me carefully define the difference. 
Superstition in all times and among all 
nations, is the fear of a spirit whose 
passions are those of a man, whose acts are 
the acts of a man; who is present in some 
places, not in others; who makes some places 
holy, and not others; who is kind to one 


person, unkind to another; who is pleased or 
angry according to the degree of attention you 
pay to him, or praise you refuse to him; who 
is hostile generally to human pleasure, but 
may be bribed by sacrifice of a part of that 
pleasure into permitting the rest. This, 
whatever form of faith it colours, is the 
essence of superstition. " 

In a moment I wish to draw some 
compariosn of these thoughts to the theology 
of Professor Hans Kung. Consider first what 
Rusk in, a monumental authority in aesthetics, 
has to say as to the nature of religion. He 

"And religion is the belief in a Spirit 
whose mercies are over all His works - who is 
kind even to the unthankful and the evil; who 
is everywhere present, and therefore is in no 
place to be sought, and in no place to be 
evaded; to whom all creatures, times and 
things are everlastingly holy, and who claims 
- not tithes of wealth, nor sevenths of days - 
but all the wealth that we have, and all the 
days that we live, and all the beings that we 
are, but who claims that totality because He 
delights only in the delight of His creatures; 
and because, therefore, the one duty that we 
owe to Him, and the only service they can 
render Him is to be Happy." 

Have we not heard those words before? 

Rusk in goes on to describe his own King 
of Kings and Lord of Lords: 

"A Spirit, therefore, whose eternal 
benevolence cannot be angered, cannot be 
appeased; whose laws are everlasting and 
inexorable, so that heaven and earth must 


indeed pass away if one jot of them failed: 
laws which attach to every wrong and error a 
measured, inevitable penalty; to every 
Tightness and prudence , an assured reward." 

At times the mason has been accused of 
being Deist. French masonic material seems to 
suffer in the translation into English. I 
believe much of our misunderstanding is 
idiomatic/ and flows from English inability to 
cope with subtleties of the French language. 
The word "atheist" may encompass a very wide 
terrain. Freemasonry, generally, conceives of 
a Grand Geometrician far far greater than the 
religions that worship him. And masonry 
believes man to be cast in the image of God 
and subject only to Him. As Lome Pierce put 
it one half century ago, the whole purpose of 
masonry is to exemplify an exalted point of 
view, a noble way of looking at life and 
living it grandly. This means to place man 
just "a little lower than the angels". 

Religion and freemasonry are not exactly 
the same. In religion man uplifts his arms to 
God. In masonry man extends his arms to all 
mankind. But, as Bishop Wright has so wisely 
observed, these are very nearly the same 

Masonry must remain at odds with 
religious intolerance, as well as with 
intolerance of any other nature or kind. 
Masonry rejoices however in any heartfelt 
expression of faith however simple or 
sophisticated that may be. Consider this 
moving and unconditional affirmation by our 
brother, Donald Fleming, to the Toronto 
Telegram on April 9, 1955: 

"Religion is the most vital and intimate 


factor in life. It embraces every 
relationship. It gives life meaning, 
perspective and proportion. 

Religion sustains my belief that: 

God is my Creator, and I am his child. 

His other children are my brothers. 

Love is the Law of life, and peace is its 

path, for all men are my neighbours. 

God's grace is sufficient for my needs, 

however unworthy I prove. 

My soul is eternal. God did not create 

it to let it die. . . 

Religion to me means Jesus Christ, Son of 

the Living God, my Saviour." 

Recently, in Toronto, the scholar priest 
Hans Kung addressed the subject "Is There One 
True Religion?" Declaring himself to be the 
Holy Father's "loyal opposition", he suggested 
that there were four possible answers: 

(1) There is ONE true religion, and all 
other religions are false. 

(2) There is NO true religion, and all 
religions are false. 

(3) There are a number of religions and 
all are equally true. 

(4) There is actually only ONE true 
religion, and the religious beliefs of mankind 
are true only to the extent and degree that 
they conform to that fundamental truth. 

For Dr. Kung, as for Donald Fleming and 
myself, there is the way of the Master. But 
Kung would not deny that for others the path 
of grace might be by other means. He noted 
many similar characteristics of the so-called 
higher religions, with respect to ethics, 
respect for the Creator and all his creatures. 
Like Dr. Frye, he thought a religion must be 


judged by its service to the human race. 

I was born in 1917, during the dire month 
of Passchendaele. During my lifetime there 
have been bitter enemies of the Craft. 

Among the most vehement of these was the 
German nationalist, General Erich Ludendorff , 
the chief originator of the Jewish-Masonic 
international conspiracy theory. He 
distrusted those who could see some virtue in 
the enemy/ the "masonic mentality" that put 
together the League of Nations and later the 
United Nations. 

During the same period there were the 
dialecticians of the Left who feared masonry 
as a social bridge that might develop a 
climate of understanding between the 
bourgeoisie and the proletariat, the oppressor 
and the oppressed. Communists wanted nothing 
to interfere with the impending explosion in 

We remember that among the first victims 
of Adolph Hitler's savagery were our brother 
masons. We recall the treachery and 
ruthlessness of Bernard Fay. Nor will we be 
able to forget the shameful collaboration of 
Field-Marshall Petain of France who joined 
Hitler in some cruel repressive ventures. My 
attitude towards masons of the Grand Orient of 
France will forever be influenced by the 
heroism of the many who served with the Free 
French forces of deGaulle and also in the 
French underground. 

I was astonished to be told, in lodge in 
Strasbourg by a German brother, that Hitler 
had actually applied for initiation to some 
lodge in Austria and had been rejected. The 


trials of Ernst Zundel and Jim Keegstra in 
1985 served to remind us of the inherent 
conflict between the Nazi outlook and our own 
masonic ideal of universal brotherhood. In 
recent years I have made two pilgrimages to 
infamous death camps in Europe. I pray never 
to forget how precious and vital are the 
values of human dignity and freedom, of common 
goodness and kindness. In Bergen-Belsen are 
incribed the words of little Anne Franck 
before she perished: 

"I believe there is some good in 
every human being". 

From its earliest days masonry has sought 
to promote the spiritual quality of life 
in order to prepare with anticipation for what 
is yet to come. Some of the most elegiac 
music by our brothers Mozart, Haydn and 
Sibelius relate to the march towards the Great 
Light. It seems most natural for military 
people to think seriously and calmly about 
death; and this is one of the reasons why, for 
them, freemasonry has had profound appeal. 

By way of example, - Sir Robert Moray: 
Moray was admitted into masonry in 1641 by an 
Edinburgh Lodge at Newcastle where he was 
serving as a general officer with the 
occupying army of the covenanters. He and his 
fellow initiate, General Alexander Hamilton, 
were artillery officers, "highly skilled in 
geometry". This founder of the Royal Society, 
according to a recent study by David 
Stevenson, displayed extraordinary openness of 
mind to all things, and not least, to things 
of the spirit. His curiosity, thirst for 
knowledge and hunger for ever greater light 
became the identifying impulses of his Royal 
Society, which was distinctly masonic in 


objective. Robert Moray's mason's mark was 
chosen with exquisite care. It was the 
pentacle, or star, and it was appropriate 
because Moray was greatly interested in 
astrology astronomy, and in navigation. But, 
he was likewise fascinated with the spiritual 
implications of the star. In his mark the 
pentacle was surrounded by the letters 
A G A P A which Moray employed as the basis 
for an acrostic which conveyed a message. 



and your 




thyself ; 







The allegory of the search is repeated 
throughout all of masonry, and its attendant 
orders, and the search is never fully 
satisfied. It would be devastating were we to 
find ourselves in full possession of the final 
word or truth. The vision of growth, 
pilgrimage and perfection would dissolve and 

Many artillery officers, skilled in the 
art of ballistics, that is to say in the 
science of geometry, have been masonic 
enthusiasts. These include Napoleon Bonoparte 
who was recognized as a brother at St. Helena 
by his British captors, as his grave attests, 
and that superb commander of World War 2, 
Field-Marshal the Right Honorable Lord 
Alexander of Tunis. 

I wonder if this learned audience knows 
that both Wolfe and Montcalm, who died at 
Quebec in 1759, were freemasons. 

"Valour gave them a common death 
History a common fame 
Posterity a common monument" 


The handsome obelisk to their eternal 
memory, close by the Chateau Frontenac, was 
laid by Lord Dalhousie in 1828. In the 
ceremony he was assisted by the sole surviving 
veteran of the battle of the Plains of 
Abraham, of either the French or British 
armies, Worshipful Brother James Thompson, 
then 96 years old. 

This tribute, conceived by Thompson and 
St. Andrew's Lodge, a lodge incidentally which 
Thompson served some fourteen times as Master, 
stands forever as eloquent testimony of 
fraternal love. 

James Thompson was a native of Tain near 
Dornoch in Ross and Cromarty, and there he 
was made a mason, an Ancient. He served in 
His Majesty's 78th Regiment of Foot, the 
famous Fraser Highlanders, who scaled the 
steep heights and then fought to win. 

My distinguished friend, Leon Patenaude 
of Montreal, who is an ambulatory treasure 
trove of masonic lore and musicology, tells me 
that a considerable number of the officers on 
both sides were masons, including Montcalm's 
deputy, the Marquis de Levis. 

After peace was restored, happily under a 
benign occupation, some of the military wished 
to get back to masonry. Three master masons 
applied to their commanding officer, the Right 
Worshipful Colonel Simon Fraser, on October 
20, 1760, requesting a warrant for holding a 
lodge. Those of you familiar with the 
formality and bureaucracy of the Craft will be 
enchanted to learn that these three worthies 
obtained their warrant very promptly and 
opened to commence fraternal work just two 


days later. 

This was no fly-by-night lodge- Records 
in the Milborne Collection in the Public 
Archives in Ottawa attest to some 397 
meetings. St. Andrew's Lodge continued to 
function until after the arrival of His Royal 
Highness the Duke of Kent in 1792. 

The minutes of September 1783 show 
visitors hailing from lodges known to be 
Ancients. A.J.B. Milborne explains that our 
brethern in Quebec had very little conception 
of the wide breach that existed in the Craft 
in England. Their rites and ceremonies were 
derived from Ireland and Scotland and these 
they continued to practice. Control from the 
Grand Lodge of England (the Moderns) appears 
to have been very loose at the time. 

Thompson had no time whatever for 
jurisdictional quarrels. In his lodge were 
many Scots of Jacobite background, and there 
were others who were Hanoverians. James Wolfe 
and "the Fighting Frasers" had met on the 
Field of Culloden, in 1746, on opposite sides. 
When the highlanders had been crushed by 
greatly superior artillery, Cumberland ordered 
they be put to the sword. Wolfe, with great 
courage, refused to obey this unjust command. 
He thereby earned the everlasting loyalty and 
devotion of the Clan. Later when hardy and 
intrepid men were required to fight in North 
America Wolfe sought them from the mountains 
of the North. Simon Fraser was commissioned 
Lieut. Colonel Commandant of the 78th Regiment 
of 2nd Highland Battalion of Foot on January 
5, 1757. 

Not only did members of St. Andrew's 
Lodge serve against the French, in 1775 some 


brethern assisted in repulsing the American 
invaders. Worshipful Master James Thompson 
has provided a most detailed account of the 
actual slaying of General Montgomery by one of 
the brethern on the night of December 31, 
1775. Other brethern dispersed with artillery 
fire the attacking forces of Colonel Benedict 
Arnold. We note that the ill-fated Colonel 
Barry St. Leger was initiated into the lodge 
in 1778. 

The box of fraternal assistance was an 
important instrument of social welfare. It 
is touching to read the records of monies 
advanced, to an abandoned American rebel, to 
numerous widows and orphans, and to ex- 
soldiers down on their luck. I read of a gift 
to some gentle Sister of Charity who had 
earned their devotion. Charity, caritas, - or 
affection, love, esteem, that is masonry 1 

There were jolly times too; it was not 
all ritual. It appears there were nine 
regular toasts drunk in an evening, three 
times three. After the toast to the King and 
the Craft there would follow toasts to the 
jurisdictions of the world. Finally, as 
chivalry surely demands, before returning home 
the brave brethern would drink one long last 
one to their fortunate wives! 

Having enjoyed fraternal hospitality in 
sundry far away places since 1940 I cannot 
understand how masonry can be confined by 
language or nationality or politics or by any 
other creature. 

In considering this question of fidelity, 
just how important is secrecy? Dr. Albert G. 
Mackey, writing over sixty years ago, 
discusses the Aristotelian virtues of secrecy 


and silence, and refers to them as "the very 
essence of all Masonic character". He asks: 
'•What are the aporrheta of Freemasonry? What 
are the arcana of which there can be no 
disclosure?" I find his answers not 
altogether clear. He recognizes that French or 
German masons , unlike the English or 
Americans, will discuss almost anything. 
American writers of his period seem to have 
insisted that modes of recognition and 
ceremonies must never be revealed. 

What about today? Much of the current 
trash now published focuses upon this aspect 
of secrecy, the hidden motive, the 
international plot or conspiracy, the 
corrupting intrigue. We recognize that the 
political climate of our times is highly 
inimical to secrecy. Current legal mores 
encourages openness. 

After all, what is the masonic secret? 
The answer given to any query from an outsider 
is generally opaque like the answer to the 
monk who enquired of Tung-shan, "Who is the 
Buddha?" Whereupon he was met with the 
answer "Three measures of flax". 

The secret of masonry is as elusive as 
the secret of Zen. When the neophyte demanded 
to know the Great Secret he was met with the 
counter query, ,l What did your face look like 
before your parents begot you", or the even 
more arresting response of a sharp clapping of 
the hands, and the question, "What sound does 
one hand make?" 

In this I find the glimmer of an answer. 
Years ago Lome Pierce wrote, "The secret of 
Freemasonry is that there is no secret." But 
he also wrote something else to the effect 


that everyone mast evolve the meaning of 
Freemasonry for himself. This is in keeping 
with Mackey's more extensive definition. 
"Masonry is commitment to the continuing 
search after Divine Truth." 

Alec Mel lor cites secrecy as the 
fundamental cause of the condemnations by the 
Holy Mother Church. Mel lor concludes: 

The time is ripe to make a clean sweep of 
everything which has managed to harm the 
masonic ideal. A kind of young freemasonry is 
feeling its way. This explosion of generosity 
will not be short-lived; it deserves to be 
followed with the most sympathetic attention. " 
Thus speaks a devout Catholic who wishes us 
well. A surprising number of Quebecers share 
his sentiments. I think the time is ripe for 
a greater openness. 

Our supposed secrets have been revealed 
many times from the days of John Coustos and 
his torture. Even the most professional 
security systems of Russia, Britain and 
America fail in keeping secrets, - vital 
secrets. It has been suggested that it is 
timely to produce, under official auspices, an 
authoratative, scholarly and complete 
compendium of all our symbolics. Jules 
Boucher believes the availability to the world 
of such material would serve to remove the 
stigma of secrecy, awaken widespread interest, 
and stimulate serious masons to even greater 
labours . 

Without sacrifice of any words of ritual 
surely we have the wit in lectures to make it 
even more clear that masonry will not 
countenance conspiracy, plotting, intrigue or 
any self interest. 


The late Stephen Knight made a tidy 
profit by vicious libel of the order in JACK 
"Sensational Revelations" in THE BROTHERHOOD. 
These works were founded upon imaginary 
corruption and crime conducted under the cloak 
of masonic secrecy. Just imagine what Sir 
Arthur Gonan Doyle, a member of Pheonix Lodge, 
and a gentleman with a passion for integrity 
and fair play, would say were he to learn that 
his own Sherlock Holmes had unmasked the most 
horrendous of Victorian sex crimes and had 
laid them all at the door of freemasonry. For 
good measure Knight attributes leadership in 
this conspiracy to the Supreme Council of the 
Scottish Rite! 

This benighted author dies at the age of 
thirty- three after five years of a developing 
brain tumour. I deplore that Ottawa 
subsidized the motion picture sequel, MURDER 
BY DECREE, through income tax write-offs. 
This movie, shocking to many of our wives and 
families, libels a deceased heir to the 
throne, and deceased British Privy 
Councillors, as well as the Craft in general. 

We have been maligned and victimized 
because we suffer the reputation of being a 
secret society. Perhaps as important, by 
holding our cards too tightly to our chest we 
have forgotten the wealth we hold in our hand. 
Secrecy is corrosive to the Order. 

Dr. Pierce once remarked that masonry has 
triumphed when its work was least occult. He 
was convinced that it would recover its former 
glory when it steps boldly into the open. 

He is right. Masonry has a vital message 


for our times, for Canada and for all of 
humanity. Masonry is committed to freedom and 
morality and whatsoever will elevate and 
dignify the human race. We should allow no 
ground for suspicion otherwise. 

Charles Morgan thought that each man must 
enquire of himself in what work, in what human 
company, in what loyalty his own voice appears 
most clear. For my grandfather, my father and 
for my own self, this type of intimate 
companionship that you and I have shared here 
tonight has afforded the richest liberation, 
fulfilment and happiness. 

As you drive home will you ponder the 
thoughts of that genius, Blaise Pascal, who 
died in 1662 at thirty years of age. 
Professor John North describes him as Newton's 
great forerunner in the establishment of 
calculus. This brilliant "geometrician" is 
remarkable for the wholeness of his vision. 
Pascal once wrote that in Jesus Christ is the 
coherence of all human experience, a source of 
satisfaction for the mind to which even 
mathematics points. 

Some brethern may not agree. Freemasons 
are never under compulsion to agree. But all 
of you, I know, will delight in his Pensee 
620, which has the appearance of a masonic 

"Man is obviously made for thinking. 
Therein lies all his dignity and his merit; 
and his whole duty is to think as he ought. 
Now the order of thought is to begin with 
ourselves, and with our author and our end." 

If the hill is high enough all things are 
seen to come together. I know because I have 


climbed some of the highest peaks in Sicily 
and Italy as an artillery forward observation 

I wrote this masonic prayer in 1944 after 

I had been wounded in those hills. With it I 

bid you, my dear brethren, a grateful 
farewell . 


Oh God, let no day die of wasting doubts or 

fears ; 
Guide this soul's struggle skyward crag to 

Until upon some summit, vista free, 
It scans beyond and from Thy breezes hears 
Whisperings of Man's truth. 

Fulfil this urge for loftier sight Oh God; 

Quicken, strengthen, this poor mind and then 

'Twill scramble down the crags, reford the 
the streams, 

Rejoin with pride this favoured breed of men. 
We are besotted, human pawn of passion, 

ignorance and lust 
Yet sill courageous, still beset with dreams. 

John Ross Matheson 



V.W.Bro. Emery I Gero 

In the heart of Central Europe there is a 
small country, Hungary. Its territory is less 
than 36 , 000 square miles, not even 1/10 of 
the size of Ontario. The population exceeds 
10 million — about the size of this 
province's present population. The Magyars 
occupied that land in A.D. 895 and kept it, in 
spite of several foreign invasions, 
occupations and influences. 

It has been characteristic of the almost 
two and half centuries of Hungarian 
Freemasonry, that the lodges could operate 
only for short periods of months or years, 
between long years of silence. These early 
centuries of Hungarian history were a 
continuous struggle between the autocracy of 
the Austrian Hapsburg Emperor and the 
determination of the Hungarian people to be 
free and independent. During the first 200 
years, the only peaceful period of improvement 
was the era of Emperor Francis Joseph, in the 
last fifty years before World War I. Apart 
from that Masons were able to meet only 
informally, that is without any ritual or 
degree work in order to keep alive the 
friendly and brotherly spirit of Masonry, and 

*Paper presented at the Regular Meeting at the 
Heritage Lodge held in the Barrie Masonic 
Temple, Barrie, Ontario, Hosted by Corinthian 
Lodge No. 96, March 19th, 1986. 


on such occasions the older generation 
introduced philosophic and humane ideas to the 
younger idealists. 

Old excavations and documents prove that 
there were early lodges belonging to Masonic 
guilds, but these lodges never became 
freemasonic lodges. 

The English form of Masonry , codified by 
James Anderson in 1723, reached Hungary 
through Austria, Germany, France and Poland, 
where travelling Hungarian noblemen learned 
the new ideas of humanity and freedom. 

The first Freemasonic Lodge in Hungary 
was founded in Brasso, Transylvania, in 1749 
by Saxon inhabitants of German origin, 
followed by other lodges also in Transylvania 
between 1750 and 1770. There were early 
attenpts in the forties and fifties, under 
Austrian influence in Pozsony, the 
parliamentary city of Hungary at that time, 
but the first lodge did not come into being 
until 1775. The first members of these lodges 
were officers of the army and government, 
higher clerical personalities, physicians, 
lawyers, judges, etc. 

Masonry also spread to Croatia, and to 
the Northern and Southern Territory. In Buda 
and Pest Masonry started around 1770 with 
military lodges; it achieved great vitality in 
the time of Grand Master Count Draskovich, who 
actually lived in Pest for several years. In 
1781 the lodges in Buda had a very illustrious 
visitor, the Crown Prince of Russia, later 
Czar Paul I. 

In 1781 the lodges declared the union of 
Austrian and Hungarian Masonry; and, under 


M.W.Bro. Count Carl Palffy, they organized the 
first Hungarian Provincial Grand Lodge. This 
new Grand Lodge was the supreme authority for 
12 lodges and acted until 1786. The brethren 
worked actively — on the one hand in the 
political field, in the court of the Emperor 
in Vienna, on behalf of Hungary, on the other 
hand in the country itself, to keep alive and 
develop the Hungarian language and spirit. 
Masons issued the first periodicals. They 
originated the idea of an Academy of Science. 
They were the first supporters of Hungarian 
theatrical art; and, in general, there was no 
important political or cultural movement in 
which - among founders or followers - masons 
couldn't be found. 

Some lodges in the provinces criticized 
the orders of Emperor Joseph II (1780-1790), 
who was not crowned as Hungarian king. As a 
result he restricted masonic activity to the 
county capitals, and in this way crippled the 
masonic work completely. Later Emperor 
Francis dissolved the lodges in 1795. 

Half a century had to pass for literary 
and political liberalism to become stronger 
again, and to render the revival of Hungarian 
Masonry possible. 

August Thoma, a bookseller of Silesian 
origin, settled in Pest, and searched out 
masons, who were living quietly with no sign 
of masonic activity. He intended to create a 
masonic lodge under the protection of a German 
Grand Lodge, but this plan couldn't be 
realised so long as Metternich, the iron- 
handed Austrian chancellor, was in power. 
When he failed in 1848, the brethern, under 
the influence of freedom movements all over 
Europe, established a lodge called: "Louis 


Kossuth, the dawn of the Glorious Light." 
Governor Kossuth paid sympathetic attention to 
the masonic work, but never became a member of 
a Hungarian Lodge. The Austrian and Russian 
invasion soon stopped the masonic meetings, 
and the disastrous end of the War of 
independence once again destroyed the activity 
of the brethern for decades to come. 

Following the defeat of the freedom 
movement in 1849, the most prominent citizens 
were forced to emigrate. Many of them became 
acquainted with masonic ideas and endeavours 
abroad. Lodges favoured the exiled Hungarians 
all around the world, and the refugees saw the 
accomplishment and resurrection of their hopes 
in the Craft, which has always stood for 
liberty, equality and fraternity. Several of 
them were initiated in Italy, Switzerland, 
France and England. The banished Govenor 
Kossuth was made a mason "on sight" in 
Cincinnati, Ohio in 1852. 

In Geneva, Switzerland there was also a 
lodge called Ister (the Latin name of the 
Danube) formed fcy Hungarian brethern and 
working under Swiss jurisdiction for over 10 

As the terror which followed the 1848-49 
war subsided, a number of these distinguished 
personalities returned to Hungary and became 
the most devout disseminators of the Light. 

Throughout the twilight of the 
constitutional era, while the Hungarian nation 
and Emperor Francis Joseph tried to effect a 
compromise, Masonry roused itself again and 
asked for recognition. Twelve brethren started 
to reorganize Hungarian Masonry and laid the 
foundation of the lodge "St. Stephen" in 1861. 


Further discussion stopped, because the 
authorities still prohibited masonic meetings. 
This situation continued until after the 
treaty between Austria and Hungary in 1867, 
when Hungary became a constitutional kingdom, 
in personal union with Austria. Meanwhile the 
flowering of Masonry started all over the 
world. Enemies of the Fratenity tried to 
prevent the revival, but Masonry had by this 
time a strong protector in the person of Prime 
Minister Count Andrassy, who was initiated in 
Paris, France during his exile. The first 
lodge in the new era started in October 1867, 
under the name: "Einigkeit and Vaterlande" 
(Unity of the Fatherland). This new lodge was 
sanctioned and protected by the Grand Lodge of 
England, through the Grand Master the Earl of 
Zetland, in 1869. 

After this first one, six more lodges 
were founded within a year, and the seven 
lodges founded the first Blue Grand Lodge in 
1870, copying the constitution of the Grand 
Lodge "Zur Sonne" in Bayreuth, Germany. The 
Grand lodge of Frankfurt was the first to 
recognize the new Grand Lodge, followed by 
many others, and soon the Hungarian Grand 
Lodge took a dignified place in the world 

About the same time the Scottish Rite 
came into being in Hungary as well, on the 
initiative of those who had entered the Rite 
abroad. They received masonic protection from 
the Grand Orient de France. Scottish Rite 
Masonry blossomed too, and after two years, 
the Grand Orient of Hungary was established, 
as a second supreme authority over the 
Hungarian Craft Masons. 

Both branches could expand freely, but 


progress was very slow. Because of cultural 
backwardness, political oppression, and 
national isolation, the public knew very 
little about Masonry. The aristocracy and 
army were reserved. The standpoint of the 
Church (Hungary is mostly Catholic) was 
antimasonic, being influenced by the 
controversy between Masonry and Church in the 
Latin states. 

It took fifteen more years until Craft 
Masonry and Scottish Rite were strong enough 
to be united and to form the Symbolic Grand 
Lodge of Hungary in 1886. Historian Franz 
Pulszky was the first Grand Master. At the 
outset the new Grand Lodge had supreme 
jurisdiction over 26 blue and 13 Scottish Rite 
Lodges, containing 1831 members. 

In the next two decades Hungarian Masonry 
reached its peak. Lodges spread all around 
the country. In the lodges the members worked 
on social problems. Their agenda included the 
provision of working opportunities for all, 
improved working conditions, diffusion of 
knowledge, care of moral standards. In this 
way developed the principal idea of the Craft: 
Masonry should not be the defender of the 
strong, but the protector of the weak, in the 
spirit of fairness and justice. 

Soon they built their Temple in Budapest 
(by then a united city), where it still 
stands. The consecration ceremonies took 
place in 1896, when Hungary celebrated her 
Millennium, the thousand th anniversary of her 
existence as a state. This was one of the 
most magnificent festivals of Hungarian 
Masonry, with the participation of the 
representatives of the Grand Lodges of New 
York, Boston, North Carolina, New Hampshire, 


Bayreuth, Berlin, Saxony, Portugal, Egypt, 
Java and the Grand Orient of Belgium. 

From year to year new lodges were formed, 
and they in turn created numerous non-masonic 
institutions. The Society for Public 
Education, Society for Crippled Children, 
Asylum for Homeless People, Children's Aid, 
Patronage Camps for Children, Distributing 
Centres for free Bread and Milk for the needy, 
and several other societies were brought to 
life by masons before the end of the 19th 

In 1877 they started a morning paper, 
edited by masons, to spread masonic spirit and 
ideas in the secular world. A masonic 
periodical, the KELET (East), had been 
published since 1875. 

In 1899 Grand Master Neuschloss 
proclaimed: "Either everyone of us must work 
to solve the great problems of human society, 
or we cease to exist"- The lodge from 
Nagyvarad (a small city in Hungary) was the 
first to publish its social programme, in 
1900, the very first in this subject ever 
announced in Hungary. Laws for the equality 
of minorities and races, reformation of 
existing juries, ecclesiastical-political 
reform, the separation of State and Church, 
the right of universal secret suffrage, 
undenominational free education for everyone, 
a campaign against duelling, emancipation for 
women agarian reforms, etc. were the main 
subjects in the lodges. 

During World War I, there were 32 lodges 
in Budapest, 51 in the country, and 11 masonic 
circles. In addition, under the jurisdiction 
of the Grand Lodge 20 more lodges existed in 


the border area and neighbouring states, 
augmenting the membership to over 7000, at a 
time when the whole population of Hungary was 
over 16 million. 

As the number of lodges continued to 
grow, the Grand Lodge entered into fraternal 
connection with supreme authorities abroad, 
and received recognition almost everywhere. 
There were active and friendly relations not 
only with the European grand lodges, but with 
overseas as well, among them the Grand Lodge 
of Canada in the Province of Ontario. 

After the treaty in Trianon (France) in 
1919, when new states were formed around 
Hungary, the Grand Lodge lost its lodges with 
the detached territories. The "Gross Loge von 
Wien" in Austria was established from the 
previous Hungarian lodges already in 1918, 
gaining protection and permission from the 
Symbolic Grand Lodge of Hungary. 

The Hungarian Grand Lodge held its last 
grand communication in January 1919. The 
individual lodges continued their meetings 
until March, but during the first communist 
government in 1919, and the counter-revolution 
and the Roumanian occupation, all masonic life 
was suppressed. The Temple was seized by a 
military group; the Minister of Interior 
Affairs dissolved all the masonic lodges, 
circles and clubs "for ever", in March 1920. 

The formal meetings stopped, but the 
brethren, assembled in the open, to keep awake 
the brotherly love and to make it possible to 
keep alive the institutions established by 
masons. The property was confiscated and the 
greatest part of the valuable contents of the 
Temple disappeared; they gradually came to 


light later, in bazaars and second hand 
markets. Only a part of the library and 
records were deposited in the National Museum 
and in the Archives. 

For a period of 25 years after 1920, a 
new epoch came into being, when no legal 
masonic meetings were held in Hungary; but the 
brethren kept alive the spirit of fellowship, 
continuing their benevolent and humanitarian 
work; and beginning in the middle twenties, 
they attracted into the Craft more than 100 
new, valuable younger men, who were initiated 

After the communist dictatorship of Bela 
Kun in 1919, Hungary became a kingdom without 
a king, with Admiral Horthy as regent. The 
authoritarian and reactionary regimes did not 
like liberal ideas. Although in the first 
years there were sever eal attacks in the 
parliament and in the press against Masonry, 
later the government overlooked their social 

In 1927, when Hungary sent an official 
delegation to the United States for the 
unveiling ceremonies of the statue of Kossuth, 
in Cleveland, Ohio, the leaders of the Masons 
were invited to send their representatives, as 
part of the official party. The masonic 
delegates, led by acting Grand Master Joseph 
Balassa (who had been Deputy G.M. in 1920), an 
internationally recognized mason, spent weeks 
in the United States, contacting masonic 

In the mid twenties, when the political 
situation eased, masons visited the lodges in 
neighbouring countries, particularly the 
previous Hungarian Lodges in Czechoslovakia 


and in Vienna, putting on formal meetings for 
the younger generation. They initiated, 
passed and raised over 100 candidates, first 
in Czechoslovak ian lodges in 1926-28, then in 
Vienna from 1928. In 1934, those who were 
initiated (or affiliated) in Vienna, formed a 
separate lodge under the protection of the 
Grand Lodge of Vienna, under the name "In 
labore virtus." The master of the lodge 
became Alexander Goldmark, who lived in Vienna 
and worked devotedly from the start to 
preserve the Light for the Hungarian brethren. 
Count Carl Lonyai, a Hungarian nobleman, also 
Deputy Grand Master in Vienna, helped him a 
great deal. The leaders of these trips from 
Hungary were G.M. Balassa and Andor Gero, who 
acted as Grand Secretary and also as the 
Master of the newly initiated group in 
Budapest; there the neophytes kept together, 
and in association with some older members, 
produced artistic, cultural and scientific 
lectures . 

Such informal meetings continued until 
the beginning of World War II, when first the 
war, then the increasing persecution, and 
finally the siege of Budapest, ended every 
possibility of contact and commune iat ion. The 
Nazis and their fellow traveller Hungarians 
dragged away and killed many worthy honorable 
brethren, and those who succeeded in staying 
alive looked forward to the arrival of a 
peaceful future. 

When the Grand Lodge was revived in 1945, 
after 25 years of silence between the two 
World Wars, the Hungarian people were tired 
and disenchanted after the long war and 
Hitler's holocaust. It hoped for a pure 
democracy, the more so because human rights 
were now written into the Constitution. The 


intelligentsia learned with sympathy and 
interest about the ideals and aims of the 
fraternity, and soon, many leading 
politicians, writers, and artists, among 
others, were petitioning for initiation. 

Joseph Balassa had passed to the Grand 
Lodge above early 1945 and Dr. Geza Supka was 
the first regularly elected grand Master. He 
was Chairman of the Democratic Party, 
President of the National Museum, and Chief 
Editor of the daily newspaper "VILAG" (World) 
which had resumed publication soon after 
Armistice. His respectability and personality 
had a great effect in drawing the elite of 
Hungarian society to Masonry. 

There were only 300 Masons in 1945, all 
of whom had been initiated either before the 
end of World War I, or elsewhere abroad 
between the two World Wars. By 1948, with the 
Grand Lodge performing the degree work, 
initiating, passing and raising sometimes 10- 
20 candidates at the same time, the membership 
increased to 1300. By 1950 this number had 
grown only to 1500, because after the 
communist takeover in 1948, an increase in 
emigration counterbalanced the number of 

After 1948, the oppression of the middle 
class increased more and more. In January 
1949, due to his vulnerable political position 
G.M. Supka felt it necessary to resign from 
the Grand Master's chair. Though in his 
letter of resignation he referred to his ill 
health, the real reason was generally known by 
the brethren. The next Grand Communication 
elected Dr. Marcel Benedek to the high post. 
He was a professor at the University of 
Budapest, an esteemed literary scholar, who 


had returned to the capital from Transylvania 
only in 1947, and soon after, had become W.M. 
of the Deak Ferenc Lodge. 

In 1949, it became obvious that the words 
repeated in the ritual, "the lodge is properly 
tyled", in reality were no longer true. After 
1948 several candidates were initiated, who 
thereafter regularly reported proceedings in 
the lodges to the Party or the Secret Police. 
As well, there were several older members, who 
were threatened by the Secret Police with the 
loss of their jobs or even their freedom, 
should they not report about lodge life. The 
results seem to show that these informers must 
have told what they knew truthfully, because 
no one was persecuted for his masonic 
activities, either while the lodges were 
operating or afterwards. Several brethern 
however were prosecuted for fictitious 
political crimes, and during investigations 
they were interrogated also about masonic life 
in the lodges. 

In early 1950, it was obvious that 
Masonry would not be able to continue working 
for long. The leaders of the Grand Lodge were 
under pressure to make political statements in 
the name of the Hungarian masonry, and it 
took great diplomatic skill on G.M. Benedek's 
part to avoid making these declarations, by 
invoking the apolitical nature of the 
fraternity. When in early June, in a radio 
broadcast, Joseph Revai, a cabinet minister, 
and chief ideologist of the communist party, 
attacked the lodges and their members because 
of their liberal attitudes, everybody realized 
that the days of legal Hungarian Masonry were 
numbered. Around 6 p.m. on the 12th of June 
1950, the Secret Police surrounded the Grand 
Lodge building. One unit entered, and while 


the commander informed the Grand Secretary, 
Andor Gero, of the Decree of Dissolution 
pronounced by the Minister of Internal 
Affairs, his men took over the administrative 
offices and confiscated all the files and 
accounts. They also took the bank books from 
the Grand Treasurer, who happened to be there. 
They cleared the brethren out of the common 
rooms. Late arrivals for meetings were turned 
away at the door. They ordered the Grand 
Secretary to summon Grand Master Benedek from 
his home. 

The interrogations of the Grand Master 
and the Grand Secretary were carried out in a 
courteous manner. Their archives and their 
masonic objects in the building were seized. 
Then the grand Master was released, but the 
Grand Secretary was taken to his private 
office where the Secret Police confiscated 
some items, and sealed a bookcase filled with 
masonic books and writings. It was shipped 
away the following day. Then they set him 
free too. The only Mason permitted to stay in 
the building was the Grand Lodge's permanent 
Tyler, who lived there and owned the 

At about the same time the lodges in 
smaller cities were occupied as well. The 
chief difference was that there were no masons 
in the buildings, and the police notified the 
W.M.s of the lodges about the order of 

On June 13th, every newspaper carried a 
short report, "The Minister of Internal 
Affairs has dissolved the Masonic lodges, 
which had recently become meeting places for 
the enemies of the Peoples' Republic, 
capitalist and other supporters of Western 


imperialism" . (It is interesting to note, 
that 30 years earlier when the Right Wing 
government had dissolved the lodges, their 
pretext was that the lodges and its members 
were playing a great role in preparing the 
country for Bolshevism. ) 

News about the occupation of the lodge 
buildings spred fast, and the brethren were 
shocked. A great many of them were afraid of 
persecution, and severed all their masonic 
ties. The more courageous cries kept together, 
visiting each other in their homes, frequently 
with their wives, so that the call would look 
like a family visit. The Grand Master, his 
deputies, and the Grand Secretary, held 
meetings regularly to plan for the future of 
the Craft and to maintain the charity work, 
which now had become more essential. 

It was no longer possible to employ the 
methods practised between the two world wars, 
to take promising candidates to other 
countries for initiation. Hungary was 
surrounded by communist countries, and the 
border to Austria was sealed with the Iron 
Curtain. The Secret Police watched carefully 
to ensure that no public meetings should take 
place, and its informers sometimes infiltrated 
even the smallest private gatherings. In 
spite of these difficulties, the friendship 
among the brethren continued. 

The permanent Tyler, through wining and 
dining, became friendly with the guards of the 
Grand Lodge building, and they closed an eye, 
so that he was able to smuggle aprons, jewels, 
valuable gavels, books of the ritual, and 
other masonic objects out of the building. 
These he distributed among reliable and loyal 
Masons. (Editors note: A number of these 


valuable treasures were displayed at the time 
of Bro. Gero's presentation). 

Before the dispersal of the Grand Lodge, 
a group of young, more radical Masons, had 
wanted to form a new lodge, to be named 
"Kossuth" after the leader of the War of 
Independence in 1848. This lodge had not yet 
become a reality before the closing of Grand 
Lodge, but even so the members of the group 
met every week after June 1950, in private 
homes, bringing their wives to cover up. They 
held regular meetings, without any ritual 
work, in which they discussed current events 
and masonic subjects. The Grand Master and 
Grand Secretary participated frequently in 
these meetings. During the spring of 1951, 
this group became so daring that, with the 
dispensation of the Grand Master, in his 
summer cottage, it passed and raised 3 of 
their members who had not reached the Third 
degree before the lodges had been dissolved. 
By this means it hoped to have enough Master 
Masons to form a lodge when the opportunity 
arose. When these degrees were being 
conferred, the W.M. 's chair was occupied by 
the Grand Master, and in the ritual he was 
assisted by the Grand Secretary and the Grand 
Preparing Master (a position similar to the 
Grand Deacon in the Canadian Grand Lodges), 
the latter being himself a member of the 
Kossuth group. This precedent was followed by 
a few more lodges, in secret meetings behind 
the closed doors of private houses, with the 
help of ardent brethren. 

That year brought new ordeals to many 
masons. The communist government, led by 
party secretary Matthias Rakosi, under cover 
of the night, dragged many masons and their 
families away from their homes in Budapest, 


and within hours relocated them, with very few 
of their possessions, on small villages or 
farms, where they had to live under inhuman 
circumstances. Most of the farmers and 
villagers did not dare to give much help or 
assistance to these "enemies of the Peoples' 
Republic." After several months of 
struggling and suffering, some of the older 
ones succeeded in finding homes in asylums 
established in smaller towns. Those who were 
not displaced from the capital tried to 
organize some help for the needy, and visited 
their friends - a dangerous undertaking; but 
many brethren were afraid to maintain any 
connections with their fellow Masons. 

Only after the death of Stalin in 1953 
did the political situation ease to any 
extent, so that some of the displaced persons 
were able to move back to the outskirts of 

A more liberal atmosphere developed 
during the period of destalinization in the 
Soviet Union, and this gave more hope for 
Hungary as well. 

The Fall of 1956 brought considerable 
changes for Hungarian Masonry. On October 
23rd, university students started a peaceful 
march through the streets of Budapest, 
striving for more freedom. Workers joined in, 
and it soon turned into a loud anti-Russian 
demonstration. The same night, when the 
Secret Police attempted to suppress the 
demonstrators, part of the Hungarian army came 
to the help of the students and workers, and 
an open battle broke out. The next day, 
Soviet troops stationed in the country began 
to join in the fighting, but many of them 
deserted their units to help the Hungarian 


cause. During the first days in November, 
many people expected Hungary to become a 
neutral and independent country like Austria. 
Grand Master Benedek cuid Grand Secretary Gero 
petitioned the Union of Engineers and 
Technicians, who were now in possession of the 
Grand Lodge building, to return it to the 
Grand Lodge. On November 3rd an agreement 
was reached by which the building would be 
shared for a time until the Union could find 
new headquarters. But the next day the 
Soviet invasion crushed all hopes. 

During the weeks and months which 
followed, 200,000 refugees left the country. 
Among them were a large number of young and 
middle aged brethren. They were followed 
within a few years by older ones. The mass 
emigration not only decreased the number of 
active Masons considerably, but also crippled 
the charity work to a great extent. The 
"Masonic Aid for Hungary", based in New York 
and under the chairmanship of R.W.Bro. Arthur 
Keil, had been contributing the largest share 
to the relief programme right from the 
dissolution of the lodges. Immediately after 
1956, it became almost the sole source for 
funds, with its contributions being 
supplemented only by small irregular 
collections . 

In March 1959, Andor Gero emigrated to 
Canada, where he soon started to organize 
Hungarian masons living in the Western 
Hemisphere. He established contacts with most 
of them, and helped them to find each other. 
By 1962, he published the roster of Hungarian 
Masons abroad, which contained 400 names and 
addresses . 


In Budapest, his duties were taken over by 
Bela Sulyok, a member of Reform Lodge, who 
under the guidance of the Grand Master, kept 
contact with the masons, visited their 
meetings, corresponded with brethren in other 
countries, and distributed the available funds 
amongst the needy. 

For some time G.M. Benedek had been 
deeply concerned about the future of the 
fraternity. He was anxious to find some means 
of arranging for succession in the leadership. 
He wrote a letter to Dr. George Takacs, who 
had by then become the head of Reform Lodge. 

"Circumstances," he wrote ,r have not 
permitted an outstanding personality to emerge 
publicly, nor do they allow the democratic 
electoral process to run its course. I find 
myself in the position of having to name my 
successor from those friends whose character 
and ability I have learned to know. To my 
successor I cannot give titles or power, nor 
even an opportunity to be recognized in 
public. I can only bestow on him duties, 
responsibilities, and anxieties. 

As long as I am alive, we shall work 
together as we have in the past. The time is 
foreseeable when our old, regularly-initiated 
members will depart. But the idea which we 
represent, social and spiritual advancement, a 
higher sense of morality and humanism, cannot 
perish with us. Even in the most perfect 
society there is a distinct need for a group 
of men to uphold the principles of humanism 
and morality. Humanism will have to alleviate 
the inevitable cruelties of the class struggle 
in our society; and, in a classless society, 
the struggle for a more humane, 
individualistic existence will have to be 


supported by the examples of a higher 

We may have to give up the great 
conjunctive bonds of form and symbols/ and in 
an informal manner we must create a circle of 
men who are worthy or capable of development. 
We shall never cease to try to educate worthy 
men to work on the rough ashlar. We may have 
to give up the rituals, but we cannot 
compromise on the essential elements, which 
are progress, morality, humanism." 

He made certain that copies of this 
letter would reach the brethren abroad, 
particularly the Hungarian lodges and circles. 
From then on Dr. Takacs, as Grand Master's 
delegate, worked closely together with the 
Grand Master. 

During the previous two centuries, due to 
the political and economic situation, several 
thousand Hungarians had emigrated to the West, 
among them many masons, who brought along the 
masonic spirit and tried to form new lodges in 
the countries to which they immigrated. They 
were usually joined by several fellow 
Hungarians, who lerned about the Craft after 
leaving home. At the turn of this Century, 
many emigrants looked for the promised land in 
America. Those who got initiated into 
American lodges, felt that, by forming 
Hungarian lodges, they could maintain the 
Hungarian spirit better. Several lodges were 
brought to life under the jurisdiction of the 
Grand Lodge of Ohio in and around Cleveland, 
which had and has a great Hungarian 
population. In 1918 Ehlers Lodge was 
constituted in New York City by Hungarians and 
it had worked till 1974. There was a masonic 
lodge formed in Connecticut in the early 


1920* s, named after the great Hungarian 
patriot, Kossuth. 

There was a new emigration wave after the 
Second World War also, and together with the 
brethern who left Hungary after 1956, they 
were able to form new Hungarian lodges in 
Argentina, Brazil and France. In Vienna, the 
Grand Lodge gave a helping hand to all the 
refugees . 

Andor Gero brought into being the Unitas 
Circle in Toronto in June 1959, and it was 
soon followed by the Unitas Circle in 

In June 1962, Andor Gero celebrated his 
80th birthday and his 50th anniversary as a 
mason. Delegations from Ehlers Lodge, New 
York, and Unitas Circle, Montreal, came to 
Toronto, and they were joined by individual 
brethren from other parts of Canada and the 
USA. , but by means of letters and telegrams 
the whole of Hungarian Masonry participated in 
the testimonial meeting, which was held 
according to the Hungarian rituals. Two 
months later the Grand Secretary passed to the 
Grand Lodge above. At its first September 
meeting, the Circle in Toronto changed its 
name to "Andor Gero Hungarian Circle in 
Toronto" and elected to the chair Bro.Desider 
Patzauer, a distinguished mason, who came from 
Arpad Lodge in Szeged. He held the gavel for 
seven years. 

In the Spring of 1963, W.Bro. Jean Szego, 
the Master of Martinovics Lodge in Paris, 
France, and W.Bro. Pablo Vamos, the Master of 
Kossuth Lodge in Buenos Aires, happened to be 
in Budapest at the same time. They held 
meetings with the leaders of the Hungarian 


masons. Upon their return, Martinovics Lodge, 
with the consent of the Grand Lodge of France, 
sent official letters to the two Canadian 
circles, conveying a message from G.M. 
Benedek. He asked them to resume regular 
lodge work, so they might initiate, pass and 
raise brethren in the name of the Symbolic 
Grand Lodge in Hungary "due to extraordinary 
times and circumstances". He added the 
promise that "when the present situation 
changes, the newly established Grand Lodge 
will recognize itself as supreme authority of 
these lodges". This dispensation was ratified 
in letters which G.M. Benedek wrote to the 
W.M's of the Canadian-Hungarian lodges on 
December 30th, 1964. 

In 1964, R.W.Bro. Arthur H. Keil obtained 
dispensations from the Grand Master of the 
Grand Lodge of the State of New York and six 
members from each of Toronto and Montreal 
became affiliated with Ehlers Lodge No. 953 in 
New York City. 

Martinovics Lodge celebrated its tenth 
anniversary in October 1966. On that 
occasion, W.M. Michel Kemeny organized an 
international Hungarian convention in Paris, 
at which more than 100 Hungarian brethren took 
part, mainly from Europe, but with a good 
representation from the North and South 
American lodges as well. There were also 
several brethren from Hungary, who attended 
regular meetings for the first time in 16 
years. They were led by Dr. Takacs, who 
represented the Grand Master, and was received 
with all honours at a meeting held by the 
Grand Loge de France and conducted in French. 
Next day some visiting brethren from Hungary 
were passed and raised, with the work being 
conducted in Hungarian. The Grand Master's 


delegate called a meeting with the leaders of 
the Hungarian lodges abroad, where they set up 
a programme so that the same topics would be 
discussed independently in each lodge, and 
reports on the discussions exchanged; they 
established a co-ordination centre in Toronto 
to keep in touch with the brethren in the 
Western Hemisphere. The participants also 
pledged regular contributions to help the 
widows and needy in Hungary. They have 
maintained that pledge ever since. 

Encouraged by the success of the Paris 
meetings, the two Canadian lodges invited the 
delegates to Canada in September 1967, on the 
occasion of Canada's Centennial Celebrations. 
Hungarian meetings were held in both Montreal 
and Toronto, with the participation of the 
Hungarian-Canadian brethren and of visitors, 
mainly from the U.S.A. and the South American 
lodges. In March 1969, the two South American 
lodges welcomed the Hungarian delegates from 
Europe and North America, and festive masonic 
meetings took place in both Sao Paulo and 
Buenos Aires, under the jurisdictions of the 
Grand Lodges of the State of Sao Paulo and the 
Argentine Republic. Both Grand Masters 
attended the meetings, in Portuguese-Hungarian 
and Spanish-Hungarian, and the Hungarian Grand 
Master's delegate was also received with all 
honours . 

Later that Spring, Bela Sulyok asked to 
be relieved of his duties as acting Grand 
Secretary. The Grand Master delegated a 
committee of three, members of different 
lodges, to administer the distribution of the 
charity funds. 

On May 30, 1964, Grand Master Benedek was 
called to the M.H. ; with him the last duly 


elected leader of the Grand Lodge of Hungary 
passed to the Grand Lodge above. Soon it 
became apparent that his kindly and revered 
personality had been the cement which had kept 
Hungarian Masonry together for two decades. 
Dr. Takacs failed to hit the right tune with 
the brethren of different lodges, and he 
became disillusioned himself. On March 23, 
1973, he notified the Hungarian lodges in 
foreign countries that, due to his age and 
physical condition, he was giving up all 
masonic activities. 

There was another international meeting 
held in Paris in 1971; there Dr. Takacs alone 
represented the Hungrian masons. It was well 
attended by brethren from Europe and both 
North and South America. The last of these 
meetings was held again in Paris, on the 
occasion of the 20 th anniversary of 
Martinovics Lodge, but on that occasion 
neither the Canadian masons, nor anybody from 
Hungary was present. 

In the years before the First World War, 
as we have seen, the Symbolic Grand Lodge of 
Hungary had held an honoured place in world 
Freemasonry, and had been in amity with many 
other bodies, including the Grand Lodge of 
Canada. When Hungarian Masonry was 
suppressed in the years after 1919, those 
fraternal relations of course had been allowed 
to lapse. Many jurisdictions move slowly in 
the matter of extending recognition. Even 
though the Grand Lodge of Hungary had renewed 
its activities for five years, from 1945 to 
1950, still by the time the doors were closed 
in 1950 it had not yet entered into formal 
relations with the Grand Lodge of Canada in 
the Province of Ontario, or with the Grand 
Lodge of Quebec. As a result, through no 


fault of their own, the brethren who 
immigrated to Canada could not be recognized 
as "regular" Masons, and could not sit in 
lodge with their Canadian brethren unless they 
happened also to belong to some "recognized" 

The brethren both in Montreal and in 
Toronto had tried for a number of years to 
become affiliated with Canadian masonry. In 
1971, the ruling Master of Unitas Lodge in 
Montreal, W.Bro. Zoltan Roman, and his 
Secretary, Bro. Stephen Kery, started 
negotiations with M. W.Bro. Egerton Brown, the 
Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Quebec, and 
scon came to an understanding, that the Royal 
Victoria Lodge No. 57 would absorb the 
Hungrian brethren. By the end of 1972, 31 
former Unitas members became members of this 
old Canadian lodge. 

Towards the end of 1973, the leaders of 
Andor Gero Lodge in Toronto came to an 
agreement with the Grand Lodge of Canada in 
the Province of Ontario. Receiving a 
dispensation from G.M. Turner, under the 
leadership of M. W.Bro. William K. Bailey (who 
had known this group for several years) and 
M. W.Bro. Harry L. Martyn, Past Grand Masters, 
they formed a new lodge under the same name. 
Four more Grand Lodge officers, V.W. Brethren 
Eugene E. Baker, William Edwards, George 
Jamieson, Lloyd Mellor, and some of the 
Hungarian Brethren who had been members of 
Ehlers Lodge, in New York, or Canadian Lodges, 
became charter members. 

On September 14th, 1974, Andor Gero Lodge 
No. 726 was consecrated. The event was a 
festive occasion not only for us, who after 
wandering in the wilderness for many years, 


finally achieved our masonic legality within 
the body of our Grand Lodge , but also for 
grand Lodge, which formed the first ethnic 
lodge in its history of more than a century. 
The ceremony was conducted by then Deputy 
Grand Master Eric William Nancekivell and 
R.W.Bro. Arthur J. Dawson, D.D.G.M. of Toronto 
District 5, with most of the acting Grand 
Lodge officers present, led by Past Masters 
William K Bailey and Harry L. Martyn. 

Our W.Bro. Dr. Ernest Simo was essential 
in forging this event. In September 1973, he 
directed a letter to Grand Secretary M.W.Bro. 
J. A. Irvine, outlining our position. This led 
to meetings with the two Past Grand Masters. 
The understanding was, that the official 
language and ritual would be that of the Grand 
Lodge, but those members of the Hungarian 
group who were not yet recognized would go 
through on abbreviated ceremonies of 
initiation, passing and raising, and become 
full Master Masons of the lodge. We could 
keep our identity, and beyond the ritual, 
could work in the spirit we had been working 
in the past. We could continue our 
educational and humanitarian programme. 

Dr. Simo went through the three degrees 
in one evening on our first meeting in January 
1974, after the lodge was constituted U.D., 
and with him our two oldest members, who had 
not mastered the English language. M.W.Bros. 
Bailey and Martyn organized the Toronto 
District lodges to provide degree teams to 
confer the three degrees on the former members 
of the Hungarian group. With special 
dispensation from the G.M. , in February 1974, 
on four consecutive Saturdays, the two Past 
G.M's provided changing teams from different 
lodges, to initiate five candidates each 


Saturday morning, pass them at noon, and raise 
them in the afternoon. By the end of 
February, all members were legally accepted 
Master Masons of this Grand Jurisdiction. 
These events, which were unprecedented in 
Canada, were the talk of the town, and we 
gained many new friends, who, after 12 years, 
still remember those unique Saturdays and come 
back to visit our lodge occasionally. 

During the following years, several of 
our members frequently visited the lodges both 
in our district and in other Toronto 
districts. At the same time we received many 
visitors who were interested in our way of 
practicing Masonry. Several of our members 
who became known in the lodges were invited to 
present papers. We also had many guest 
speakers trying to teach us, or explain to us, 
the Canadian and North American ways of 
practicing Masonry. In 1976, on a Toronto 
District 5 Education Night, we demonstrated 
the Hungarian initiation (in English); this 
was repeated in 1985 with R.W.Bro. Wallace E. 
McLeod, our honorary member, in King Solomon's 
chair, and will be performed again in May 1986 
on a Toronto District 3 Education Night. 

When Heritage Lodge was formed, we 
considered ourselves too young in Canadian 
masonry to become charter members, but W.Bro. 
Simo and myself were among the first 10 on the 
regular members ' roster. Since then, several 
of our Past Masters have affiliated. 

Unfortunately some of our members became 
disenchanted with the repetitious degree work, 
and not finding enough educational and 
humanitarian work in other lodges, stopped 
attending altogether. Several found it a 
burden to practice even the opening and 


closing ceremonies, and throughout the years 
seven of our members have left our ranks 
asking for a demit. Naturally, we have also 
lost some members who regrettably have passed 
to the Grand Lodge Above. 

Luckily, partially due to new 
initiations, partially through affiliationns 
from othr lodges, and because of several 
brethren, who had been members of Royal 
Victoria Lodge in Montreal but moved to 
Toronto, our Lodge has increased, and now we 
can count 45 members. This growth in ten 
years is not substantial, but throughout the 
years we have tried to maintain our identity, 
and that necessarily put a limit on opening 
our doors to prospective candidates. 

It is regrettable, but inevitable, that 
our original members who brought and 
established the educational and humanitarian 
nature of Hungarian masonry are growing old 
and sooner or later will disappear from the 
scene. The younger ones will blend in more 
and more into Canadian masonry, and we hope 
they will be able to keep the lodge working 
for many years. 

Inside Hungary, the outlook is grim. 
This year is the 100th anniversary of the 
formation of the Symbolic Grand Lodge in 
Hungary. The Temple is dark, silence prevails 
under the columns. There will not be any 
celebrations. Time has taken its toll. Not 
one past Grand Lodge officer remains alive in 
the country. The Relief Committee still 
exists with new members, none of them under 
70. At the last count, there were still 55 
on the receiving end. There are a handful of 
Masons in Hungry who were initiated during the 
last two decades secretly in Vienna, Germany 


or France, but far too few. 

This long dormant period is by no means 
new in the history of Hungarian masonry. In 
the 19th century, after almost 100 years of 
silence the lodges came to life. 

We can only hope, if and when the 
political situation changes, there will be 
someone somewhere who will rekindle the flame, 
and the Lights of Wisdom, Strength and Beauty 
will shine again in the Symbolic Grand Lodge 
of Hungary. 



"Hie History of Hungarian Freemasonry" 

R.W.Bro. Balfour LeGresley 

I mast congratulate you Brother Gero on 
contributing to the Hertitage Lodge 
collection, a paper of great importance. It 
is fitting that we should record the history 
of masonry in other countries so that brethren 
with ancestry in those countries will have a 
true and detailed knowledge of their masonic 
roots. It is especially important that the 
sequence of events that led to the institution 
of Andor Gero lodge be recognized and 

It is proper that I tell you that I was 
asked some time ago, to give this report on 
behalf of W.Bro. John Hunter who had not 
expected to be here. I have read the paper 
and offer my own comments together wtih some 
that were given by W.Bro. Hunter. When it was 
discovered that he could be here tonight I 
offered to return this privilege to him but he 
coerced me into continuing. 

I must first commend Brother Gero on the 
considerable length of the paper and the 
detail it contains. Let me say that I am 
always impressed by the manner in which Emery 
Gero and the members of Andor Gero Lodge have 
learned to express themselves so effectively 
and so fluently in their new language of 
English. It makes me feel very humble and 
inadequate by comparison as I am not sure that 
I could learn to perform as well in Hungarian. 

Bro. Gero, you have covered almost 250 
years of Hungarian Freemasonry since the first 


symbolic lodge in Brasso which you mentioned. 
It seems obvious that you had to limit the 
detail you could present on much of the early 
period however I do hope that when your paper 
is printed, you will include referencs to 
your sources so that future researchers will 
know where to begin their search for more 

W.Bro. John Hunter in 1976 presented a 
shorter but detailed paper before Andor Gero 
Lodge entitled "Freemasons in 18th Century 
Hungary". He provides important political 
background for the times when Freemasonry 
first appeared in Hungary and was later 
banned, and he introduced two brethren who 
were important after 1790: Brother Kazinczy, 
whose diary described the masonry of that 
period and Brother Martinovits who gave his 
life for the cause of freedom. 

Brother Marinovits was an ex-Franciscan 
Monk, a University Professor, a writer and 
Journalist, who brought Jacobite ideas 
from Paris. He organized a group that was seen 
as being subversive because it promoted 
freedom of the individual and national 
independence at a time of political 
oppression. Martinovic and six others, five 
of them masons, were arrested and executed 
for treason. We have heard mention tonight of 
Martinovits Lodge in Paris and I wonder if 
this lodge was named in honour of this freedom 
fighter who was martyred. Perhaps Brother 
Gero can enlighten us further on this point. 

Brother Kazinczy was found in possession 
of the cathecism which the Martinovits group 
used to express their beliefs and for this 
was condemned to death. His sentence was 
commuted to life imprisonment and he spent 


six-and-a-half years in a dungeon in Austria. 
The experiences of Brothers Martinovits and 
Kazinczy show us that masons in those times 
fought with a purpose for ideals which today 
we propound in our ceremonies but which we are 
not challenged to defend, and which we perhaps 
take for granted. 

Brother Gero several times mentioned 
Louis Kossuth, and the tribute paid to him by 
masons both in Hungary and in the United 
States through their having named Lodges in 
his honour. It appears to me that Louis 
Kossuth is being honoured more as a symbol of 
the freedom and democracy inherent in masonry 
than for his importance as a mason. 

My own research has shown that Louis 
Kossuth was a left-wing patriot and 
politician. He was an orator who could 
arouse fire in the breasts of his audience. 
He was the force behind the revolution for 
freedom in 1848 in Hungary, and for a brief 
time was appointed Governor until he was 
forced to flee to spend the rest of his life 
in exile. 

As Brother Gero has indicated, he was 
made a mason rather casually in Cincinnati in 
1852 while 'passing through' on a speaking 
tour to gather support for his fight for 
political freedom in Hungary. We are taught 
that politics and masonry are not to be mixed 
yet it seems that he was taking advantage of 
it, if not as an actual weapon, certainly as a 
source of strong support for his cause. 

It should be of interest to us that 
although Kossuth's period of masonic activity 
was very brief, perhaps only a year or two, he 
is still hailed by hungarian masons as a hero. 


I think this shows the manner in which the 
principles of masonry stand out as a beacon 
lighting the path to freedom and democracy and 
provide a practical basis for the fight for 
political freedom. 

I note Brother Gero that the bulk of your 
paper details the more recent decades 
following the revival of the Grand Lodge of 
Hungary in 1945 and the events that ultimately 
led to the formation of the Andor Gero Lodge. 
The detail in this part of your paper is 
outstanding and it will be wonderful to have 
in our records a description of these events 
written by one who was there. 

Worshipful Master, I think we must all 
agree that the paper this evening has provided 
us with a rich experience. We have had a 
lesson in history, a lesson in philosophy and 
in politics, and we have seen that when 
brethren of spirit are firm in their resolve, 
no barrier is too difficult for them to 
overcome. Brother Gero, It has been a 
privilege to be able to make comments on your 
excellent paper. May I express to you the 
appreciation of the Lodge and wish you every 
success in your masonic work. 



R.W. Bro. K.L. Whiting 

There is an old cliche that says - You 
win some and you lose some. 

Well today I have won one, for it is my 
good fortune to have the opportunity to 
introduce to the brethren assembled, my good 
friend Glen Jones, the Archivist of Heritage 
Lodge and our Guest Speaker today. 

Glen brings an impressive list of Masonic 
credentials with him to support his talk, "The 
Byways of Masonry", which is an insight into 
the development of some of the appendant 
Masonic bodies to Which many of the brethren 
present belong and which are interesting 
sidelines to the conventional Masonic path 
which we all traverse. 

Glen was born in Swansea, South Wales, 
Great Britain in 1938. His parents emigrated 
to Alberta in 1940 and when Glen grew up he 
graduated from the University of Alberta with 
a BSc in Electronic Engineering in 1961. He 
worked in England, Hamilton and Waterloo 
Ontario before settling in Ottawa in 1969 and 
is now employed by Bell-Northern Research in 
charge of corporate micro-computer network. 

He is a member of the Association of 
Professional Engineers of Ontario, Past 
President of the Ottawa-Georgetown twinning 
committee and is a Past President of the 
Kanata Ontario Jaycees. 


Glen was initiated in By town Lodge #721 
in 1976 and affiliated with Chaudiere Lodge 
#264, serving as that Lodge's Worshipful 
Master in 1983. 

Research into Masonic History and 
symbolism became his hobby, in fact if it 
wasn't necessary to work for a living, I am 
sure it would have become his avocation. In 
1980, in honour of the 125th Anniversary of 
our Grand Lodge, he produced a catalogue of 
the Masonic collection of the late A.J.B. 
Milborne, the noted Canadian Masonic Scholar 
from Montreal, which is housed in the Public 
Archives of Canada. 

He joined Capital City Council #154 of 
the Allied Masonic Degrees of the USA as a 
Charter Member in 1979 and was its Sovereign 
Master in 1981. He played a strong part in 
helping to found the Canadian Association 
Allied Masonic Degrees Councils and was 
president of that body in 1984. 

When the Grand Council Allied Masonic 
Degrees of Canada was formed in the fall of 
1984, Glen was elected to the office of Junior 
Grand Warden, however, due to the untimely 
death of the Deputy Grand Master R.Ven. Bro. 
Reg Forest-Jones he was prevailed upon to 
assume the mantle of Deputy Grand Master of 
AMD in Canada. At the first Annual 
Communication of the Grand Council of Allied 
Masonic Degrees of Canada held in London 
Ontario on October 19, 1985, R.Ven Bro. 
Glenson T. Jones was elected and installed as 
M.Ven. Bro. Glenson T. Jones, Grand Master, 
Grand Council of allied Masonic Degrees of 

Glen is also a past Celebrant VTI grade 


of the Toronto College, Societas Rosicruciana 
in Anglia, which is the Rosicrucian Society of 
Freemasons . 

He is the Historian of his mother Lodge, 
Bytown #721 and has been the Archivist of 
Heritage Lodge for the past three years. 

Glen is an officer of Ottawa Chapter #222 
Royal Arch Masons; a member of the 
Correspondence circle of Quatuor Corona ti 
Lodge #2076, of London England; A member of 
the Maine Lodge of Research and also of the 
Southern California Lodge of Research. He is 
a member of Gedeliah Council #16 Royal and 
Select Masters; Ottawa Perceptory #32 Knights 
Templar; St. Aidens York Rite College #68; 
York Tabernacle #93 Holy Royal Arch Knight 
Templar Priests; Ottawa Lodge of Perfection, 
Murray Chapter Rose Croix and the Ottawa 
Consistory 32°, of the Ancient and Accepted 
Scottish Rite. He is a member of the Grand 
College of Rites of the USA; the Knight Masons 
of the USA; Canada Council #27, Universal 
Craftsmen Council of Engineers; The 
Philalethes Society; The Royal Order of ERI, 
in England; and the Worshipful Society of Free 
Masons (Operative), also in England. 

As if his own Masonic activities were not 
enough, some of which require his driving from 
Ottawa to Toronto several times each year, he 
is also a member of the advisory board of 
Ottawa Assembly #3 of the Order of Rainbow for 
Girls. His Daughter Paula is current Worthy 
Advisor of that group. 

A worthy Scholar, a dedicated Mason an 
ardent Historian and happily for me, a good 


Brethren, it is my pleasure to introduce 
W.Bro. Glenson Trelevyn Jones and his 
presentation "The Byways of Masonry". 



W.Bro. Glenson T. Jones 

1. Introduction 

My purpose in writing this paper is to 
put some perspective on the growth of 
"addition degrees" within Freemasonry. I 
have tried to give an overview of when and 
where these additional degrees and Rites arose 
and, to some extent, the reasons for their 
growth. The development of each body has been 
followed up to the point of the establishment 
of the first Grand Body from which our present 
Grand Lodges, Chapters, Councils, 
Consistories, etc. can be said to have 

I had intended to follow the development 
of each rite through to the establishment of 
the first permanent Grand Body in Canada, but 
soon found that there was too much material 
for a single paper of any reasonable length. 
I hope to extend this study in these 
directions in another paper. Also, much as 
some of the bodies formed in the 1800s. such 
as the Societas Rosicruciana In Anglia and the 
Allied Masonic Degrees, are dear to my heart, 
I will leave these to another paper. 

*Paper presented at the Regular Meeting of the 
Heritage Lodge held in the Brockville Masonic 
Temple, 3 George St., Brockville, Ontario, 
Saturday afternoon, May 17, 1986. 


2. Early Operative Masonry 

It is clear that early operative masonry 
developed more or less directly from the craft 
gilds in England. Masons were not alone in 
having such assemblies or associations. In 
fact there were forty seven known craft gilds 
in London in the 14th century (Ref.8.3.2-3 
pg.7). Masonic gilds, in fact, were probably 
among the least prevalent at that time. 

The gilds which became the strongest and 
which survived the test of time were those of 
a religious character, having various social 
and benevolent functions. The rise of the 
gild organizations is strongly linked to the 
social, economic and industrial development of 
England during the 11th through 18th 
centuries. One of these, the London Masons' 
Company, is known to have had a continuous 
existence back to at least 1418 A.D. 

Many of the old operative lodges had Old 
Charges or manuscript constitutions. The 
possession of one of these was viewed as full 
and sufficient authority to maintain an 
independent existence as a lodge. Some 120 of 
these have been found and analyzed. They date 
from C. 1390 through the 18th Century. 

The ritual of the time was very simple. 
It consisted of a prayer or invocation, a 
reading of historical portions of the Old 
Charge, typically illustrating the progression 
of the craft from the Holy Land to England, 
the story of the Athelstan-Edwin assembly at 
York, the oath of fidelity, the reading of the 
"Charges" and the sealing of the oath on the 
manuscript. It was not until C.1640 that 
evidence of masonic secrets in an admission 
ceremony is found. 


3. The Growth of Non-Operative Masonry 

We find non-operative members being 
admitted to operative lodges as early as 1634. 
At first only a few "gentry" members joined 
the simple operative lodges, but by 1646 there 
was at least one lodge composed entirely of 
non-operatives . 

I imagine that all of you have heard the 
words; " is not in the power of any Man or 
Body of Men to make innovation in the Body of 
Masonry". How many of you realize that these 
words were not derived from the Operative 
constitutions or Old Charges but first 
appeared in the Book of Consititutions of the 
United Grand Lodge of England in 1827? 

It is further interesting to note that 
these words are misquoted because what it 
actually says is; ".. it is not in the power 
of any Man or Body of Men to make innovation 
in the Body of Masonry without the Consent 
first of the Annual Grand Lodge". 

T.O. Haunch states (Ref. 8.3.2 -5 pg. 
149-167) that Grand Lodge itself was an 
innovation; that independent Lodges of free 
and accepted masons had existed back as far as 
the 17th century. When the four London lodges 
formed themselves into the first Grand Lodge, 
they did so not to control the degees or to 
defend any landmarks, but rather, as they 
said, 'to cement together under a Grand Master 
as the Center of Union and Harmony'. It is 
doubtful if any of the participants thought 
of anything more than a social purpose in 
getting the lodges together in an assemblage 
or ' grand lodge ' . 


4. The Early Grand Lodge Period 

Early speculative Craft Masonry consisted 
of only two degrees, the EA. and Fellow-of-the- 
Craft or Master's Part (Ref. 8.3.1-12) but, 
soon after the formation of the first Grand 
Lodge, the Master's Part evolved into the MM 
degree and a separate PC degree was developed 
from part of the EA degree. The whole 
process of the development of speculative 
Masonry, has been one of speculating or 
exploring the mysterious something which non- 
operative Masons found in the primitive 
Operative ritual and traditions. 

Lionel Vibert states (Ref. 8. 3. 2-4, pg. 31) 
that the trigradal system, that we know today 
as Craft Masonry, is a development at the 
hands of speculative craftsmen from a Gild 
system which consisted originally of a simple 
oath of admission for young apprentices, a 
ceremony for his later full membership and, 
perhaps, another rite associated with 
mastership. He places the development of the 
PC Degree at about 1730, long after the 
formation of the first Grand Lodge. Robert 
Lindsay (Ref. 8.3.5-2) places this about 5 
years earlier. 

The first Grand Lodge was not in a 
position, or of a mind to dictate to lodges in 
general, outside, perhaps of those in the 
London area. We have no record of the actions 
of Grand Lodge until 1723 when the first 
minute book was started, except the writings 
of Anderson in his 1738 issue of the "New Book 
Of Constitutions". 

By 1723, however, Grand Lodge was 
consolidating its position. It had elected 
its first Grand Master of noble blood and was 


assuming administrative powers relative to the 
lodges in and around London. The 1723 
Constitutions indicate, however, that Grand 
Lodge was acting purely locally, in that the 
Book of Constitutions was for use by the 
lodges in London and Westminster. 

Haunch states (Ref. 8.3.2-5 pg. 51-53) 
that, in England, the first half of the 18th 
Century after 1714 was one of good government, 
of peaceful economic develoment and of a new 
enlightened social philosophy. In this 
environment, and after the formation of Grand 
Lodge in 1717, Freemasonry flourished and 
became very popular. 

Pope (Ref. 8.3.2-4 pg. 471-474) shows 
that the number of Lodges in London increased 
from 4 to 116 from 1717 to 1740, and then 
dropped sharply to about 75 by 1757. The 
count then rises again to 160 by 1760. He 
ascribes this to a number of factors, 
including the unstable condition in England 
from 1740 to 1750 which culminated in the 
unsuccessful Jacobite Revolution of 1745, the 
shift from the former Christian character of 
Masonry, the Papal bull against Freemasons of 
1738, a period of disfavor of English society 
toward Freemasonry triggered by the exposures 
of 1723 and 1730, and the four London mock 
processions by the scald Miserables between 
1741 and 1745. 

5. The Evolution of Speculative Masonry 

B.E. Jones (Ref. 8.3.1-5 pg.493) points 
out that the development of the MM degree with 
its Hi ramie legend sometime prior to 1730 
seemed to have left the Brethren somewhat 
uncontent as it appeared to leave something to 


come later. This could account for the rapid 
rise of the Royal Arch which offered what 
could be seen as the completion of the third 
Degree. It was probably also a factor 
encouraging the rise of the Itoyal Order and 
the Scot's or ecossais degrees. 

Robert Lindsay (Ref. 8.3.5-2) believed 
that the Grand Lodge of 1717 began diverging 
from the ways of Accepted Masonry after the 
publication in 1723 of the Constitutions in 
that it removed the original Christian basis 
for membership and substituted a deistic one, 
i.e. requiring a belief in "the Religion in 
which all Men agree". He states (pg. 41) that 
this was one of the motivations for the 
formation of the Royal Order in London between 
1725 and 1741. The Royal Order of Scotland 
was formed with the assistance of a warrant 
issued in 1750 by the governing body which was 
known as The Provincial Grand Lodge in South 
Britain. The original Royal Order in England 
seems to have disappeared about the time of 
the formation of the Grand Lodge of the 
Ancients (1751), and Lindsay implies (pg. 37) 
that these events may have been related. It 
may interest you to know that this book by 
Lindsay was edited and amended by Bro. A.J.B. 
Milborne, a Past Provincial Grand Master of 
the Provincial Grand Lodge of the Royal Order 
in the Province of Quebec and a full member of 
the Qua tor Corona ti Lodge of research. 

The early "Scot's" or "Ecossais" degrees 
also developed around 1730 to 1740, and 
probably for similar reasons. There are two 
main theories of the origin of these degrees. 
The first is that they originated in England 
about 1730 and then spread to France about 
1735 where they became very popular. The 
second theory is that they developed in France 


about 1725, partly in reaction to the new 
theism of English Craft Masonry as indicated 
in Anderson's Constitutions of 1723. (Refs. 
8.3.4-5 pgs. 3-10 & 8.3.1-8 pgs. 9-34). 

The first mention of higher degrees in 
England is that of a Scots Master Lodge which 
met regularly in 1733 at the Devil's Tavern in 
London. There are other references to Scotch 
or Scot's Masonry in England through 1758. 
Interest in these degrees seems to have 
declined after 1740. It has been noted that 
the higher degrees were tainted in many 
English minds with a Jacobite flavor. The 
Jacobites were the supporters of the Stuart 
pretender to the throne of England. They were 
known to have been active in the promotion, 
and perhaps the development, of higher degrees 
especially in France. The Jacobite cause 
culminated in the abortive 1745 Rebellion. 

English Craft Masonry was carried to 
France soon after the formation of Grand Lodge 
and the first lodge was founded about 1725. 
High degree masonry is known to have existed 
in France since 1737 and there were high 
degree lodges in Paris about 1742. In 
addition to whatever motivation that the de- 
Christianization of Craft Masonry may have 
produced, there were in France two other 
influences which could have influenced the 
growth of the High Degrees. These were, a 
difference in national temperament, and the 
fact that, in contrast to England where 
Masonry appealed primarily to the middle 
class, Masonry in France was often an upper 
class activity. The Higher Degree lodges were 
a means to distance themselves from the middle 
classes who later swarmed to Craft Masonry. 
These bodies could set their own rules for 
membership which often included intellectual 



There are hints of what is now known as 
Royal Arch symbolism prior to the formation of 
the first Grand Lodge. There were many 
references during the 1720s to Arch Symbols 
and to movable letters which could refer to 
early RAM development. In the 1730s, definite 
references have been found to higher degrees 
and to Scots Master Lodges. Bernard Jones 
(Ref. pg. 38-43) states that the 
early "Scots" degrees contained much material 
which is today found in the Royal Arch and the 
Mark Degrees. He adds that it cannot be said 
with certainty that the Royal Arch developed 
from the Scots Degrees or vice versa but he 
thinks that the evidence points to the former. 

The first printed reference to the Royal 
Arch was in 1743 and there is reasonable 
evidence that a RA ritual was worked in 
Scotland in the early 1740s. RA ceremonies 
were worked in Ireland before 1759 and in the 
U.S.A. in 1753. 

The rise and growth of the Royal Arch was 
greatly influenced by the establishment of a 
rival Grand Lodge, the "Ancients". This 
second Grand Lodge was formed in 1751 by a 
group of largely Irish and Scottish masons 
residing in England. They were joined by many 
discontented English masons. The premier 
Grand Lodge was soon nick-named the "Moderns" 
because they were charged, not entirely 
fairly, with making innovations in the Ancient 
Landmarks; including de-Christianizing the 
ritual, abandoning portions of the ritual, 
ignoring the esoteric Installation of the 
Master and refusing to acknowledge the 
antiquity of the Royal Arch. 


We cannot go into the development of this 
conflict or its resolution some 60 years later 
except to point out that the Royal Arch 
received great attention from masons of both 
camps in the ensuing years, partly because the 
Ancients came to be called the Grand Lodge of 
Four Degrees. Many "Modern" masons acquired 
this degree and a number of "Modern" lodges 
were known to have practiced the degree under 
their Craft warrants, without official 
approval, but also without much objection. 

The world's first Grand Chapter came 
about, not at the hands of the Ancients, as 
might have been expected, but among the Modern 
masons. The Ancients didn't need a Grand 
Chapter since they were encouraged to practice 
the Royal Arch under their Craft warrants. 
The Moderns, however, were, at least 
officially, forbidden from assembling in 
higher degrees under their Craft warrants. 

The first Grand Chapter was formed on 
July 22, 1766 (Ref. 8.3.2-3 pgs. 280-284 and 
Ref. This was accomplished by 
signing of the Charter of Compact by 30 
"Modern" masons who had "passed the Arch". It 
is very significant that although the Grand 
Lodge, as a point of policy, had no use for 
the Royal Arch, the person who signed as the 
head of that Grand Chapter was none other than 
Lord Blayney, who was at that time the Grand 
Master of the Moderns 1 11 Other important 
members were Thomas Dunckerley, John Allen and 
Thomas French. 

This Grand Chapter did not immediately 
assume governing functions, in fact it acted 
largely as a Chapter for three years. In 
1769, however, it started issuing Charters for 
subordinate Chapters and by 1781 a total 25 


had come into existence. One of these 
Charters went to Quebec, in 1780. The 
Ancients formed their Grand Chapter about 1771 
to defend their right to the degree. 

Referring back to the Royal Order of 
Scotland, I mentioned that it was formed with 
the assistance of a warrant issued by the 
Provincial Grand Lodge in South Britain in 
1750. This phrasing needs to be explained. 
The Warrant was a Patent appointing one 
William Mitchell as Provincial Grand Master of 
the Order in the Seven Provinces, now known 
as the Netherlands. The Warrant idicates that 
it was signed in the 9th year of the 
Provincial Grand Mastership of the signator. 
The name of the P.G.M. is only given as Sir 
William R.L.F. (R.L.F. stood for the 
characteristic - Relief). 

It is not known if Mitchell ever 
exercised these powers in the Seven Provinces 
but it is known that he resided in Edinburgh, 
Scotland from 1753 on. He started recruiting 
for the Order in 1754 and had established a 
Chapter about 1763. By 1767, this Chapter had 
raised itself into the present Grand Lodge and 
Grand Chapter of the Order. 

It is interesting to note that one of the 
documents issued by the Grand Secretary of the 
original Provincial Grand Lodge of South 
Britain listed the regular Chapters by 
seniority. The last entry, written fcy a 
different hand, probably Mitchell's, was the 
Provincial Grand Chapter at Norfolk, Virginia, 
constituted Oct. 12, 1752. Nothing has ever 
been found of this body but a set of jewels 
which seem to have come from it, came into the 
hands of the present Grand Lodge of the Order 
in 1775. 


The picture is not nearly so simple when 
one looks at the Scot's or Ecossais degrees. 
I mentioned that these were developing in 
England and France sometime after 1730. The 
information is very confused as many Rites or 
systems of higher degrees were springing up in 
the mid to late 1700s, especially in France. 
The one of most immediate interest is the Rite 
of Perfection of 25 degrees which seems to 
have developed between 1750 and 1771. It is 
from this root that our present Ancient and 
Accepted Scottish Rite has arisen. 

In August 1761, a patent was issued in 
the name of the Grand Master of the Grand 
Lodge of France, to Stephen Morin granting him 
the authority to promote freemasonry 
throughout the world. Jackson (Ref. 8.3.4-5 
pgs. 39-46) was not certain that the original 
patent gave Morin the authority to confer the 
high degrees but the signators had the 
authority to give this to him, had they wished 
to do so. Morin was not able to take his 
patent back to the West Indies immediately 
because the ship he was traveling on was 
captured by the English and he spent a year or 
more in England. As a civilian, he was fairly 
well left to his own devices and he later 
claimed that he had met the Grand Master of 
the Moderns, Lord Ferrers and had been warmly 
received. He further claimed the Lord Ferrers 
had added his approval by co-signing the 
Patent. The original Patent has never been 
found but several copies, apparently made from 
it, have turned up. 

Morin arrived in the West Indies in 1763 
and immediately started developing the Rite of 
Perfection and translating some of the 
documents into English. He started calling 


himself "Inspector and Deputy of the Grand 
Lodges of France and England" and before his 
death claimed to control all the degrees from 
4 to 29, which was 4 degrees more than existed 
in the Rite of Perfection. He was said to 
have signed himself as 33 degree as early as 

He was apparently very flamboyant and 
exploited his masonic authority to the full. 
This earned him many enemies. In contrast, 
his deputy, Henry Francken, was a much easier 
man to deal with and made many influential 
friends. Together they founded a Consistory 
of Princes of the Royal Secret in Jamaica. 

After Morin's death in 1771, Francken 
completed the production and revision of the 
rituals. He authorized a Lodge of Perfection 
at Albany and issued a number of patents as 
Deputy Inspectors General, both in the West 
Indies and in America. Francken died in 1795. 

The growth of the Rite of Perfection lost 
its direction after 1780 and became very 
chaotic especially in America where the 
various Deputy Inspectors General became very 
independent. The Grand Council in Paris 
disappeared during the French Revolution in 
the late 1700s. 

In 1795, Comte de Grasse-Tilly and his 
father-in-law, Jean Baptiste Delahogue, 
arrived in Charleston. It is not clear what 
part they played but, with their assistance 
the American Supreme Council of the Ancient 
and Accepted Scottish Rite was founded on 31 
May 1801. Twelve vers later this Supreme 
Council set up the Supreme Council for the 
Northern Jurisdiction of the United States of 
America and subsequently changed its title to 


the Supreme Council for the Southern 
Jurisdiction. From these two Supreme Councils 
have come all the presently existing Supreme 
Councils throughout the world. 

Coil (ref. 8.3.1-7 pgs. 343-345) believes 
that the Knight Templar degree arose in France 
sometime after 1741, along with the Rose Croix 
and Kadosh degrees, as one of the continental 
high grades. It probably entered England and 
Scotland in the mid 18th century via Ireland. 
The Early Baldwin Encampment in Bristol became 
its initial and leading exponent. Much is 
unknown about its origin and progress. 

The Knights Templar degree probably 
spread to our continent by Military Lodges in 
the British forces. The first written 
reference to a Masonic Templar degree or 
ceremony is in the minutes of St. Andrew's 
Royal Arch Lodge or Chapter at Boston, Mass. 
for Aug. 28, 1769. R.V. Harris (Ref. 
2) wrote an interesting paper on the beginning 
of Knight Masonry in Canada. He says that the 
most likely source of the K.T. ritual worked 
in Boston was an Irish military lodge called 
Lodge "Glittering Star" # 322. This Lodge and 
it's associated Regiment served several times 
in Canada and in 1966 was in Gibralter. 

The first Grand Conclave of the Grand 
Elect-Knights Templar Kadosh and Holy 
Sepulchre of St. John of Jerusalem, Palestine, 
Rhodes and Malta was held in London in 1791. 
Thomas Dunckerley was appointed Grand Master 
of the Knights of the Rosy Cross, Knights 
Kadosh and Knights Templar in 1793 by the Duke 
of Kent, the Grand Patron of the Order. 

The Order in England fell into abeyance 
upon Dunckerley* s death in 1795 until revived 


in 1804 by the Charter of Conf irmation issued 
by the Duke of Kent. The Order waxed and 
waned over the next 70 years, becoming first a 
Grand Conclave and then a Convent General in 

In the United States, a Grand Encampment 
had been formed in Philadelphia in 1795 but 
this expired fairly soon after formation. The 
first one which is still in existence was 
formed in Providence, R.I. in 1805 and was 
originally called the United States Grand 
Encampment. In 1816 it dropped the reference 
to United States and evolved into the Grand 
Encampment of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. 
The National Great Priory of the Dominion of 
Canada was formed in 1876. 

The Royal & Select Masters of Cryptic 
Rite was the 1st of the major Rites to be 
organized. The Select Master degree evolved 
from an earlier degree called Select Masons of 
27 (Ref. 8.3.1-8 pgs. 536-539) which was 
contained in the rituals brought to this 
continent about 1762 by Stephen Morin as a 
side degree of the Rite of Perfection. The 
Royal Master degree is unknown before 1804 and 
Coil quotes Gould as stating that the earliest 
authoritative account of the working of the 
degree was in 1807. 

The first Grand Council of Royal and 
Select Masters which has survived to today is 
that in Connecticut which was formed in 1818 
although there was an earlier attempt in New 
York State in 1810. Robertson (Ref. 
pgs. 138-140) states that the first three 
Councils of Royal and Select Masters in Canada 
were formed by a charter from the Grand 
Council of the State of Maine, dated May 18, 
1867. These Councils immediately proceeded to 


form themselves into the Grand Council of 
Royal and Select Masters for New Brunswick. 

6. Conclusion 

I have tried to show, in this paper a 
flow or connected-ness of Masonic speculation 
from the early operative workings to the major 
Rites in existance today. There is no one 
direct path or goal to this growth as it 
represents the combined efforts of many Masons 
over several centuries. 

We are told that Freemasonry is a system 
of morality, veiled in allegory and 
illustrated by symbols. The various Rites and 
ceremonies provide the allegory and explore 
the symbols. The appendant Orders do not 
detract from Freemasonry but allow those with 
special interests to explore the symbols in 
their own ways. Most of those who I know are 
heavily involved in these Rites, are also 
heavily involved in Craft activities. 
Masonry is what Masons do. Let us do our best 
to be the ideal of a Mason, as we understand 
one to be. 

7. Glossary 

AQC - Ars Quatuor Coronatorum 

Transactions of Quatuor Coronati Lodge 
No. 2076 

CMRA - Canadian Masonic Research Association 


8. References and Works Consulted 

8.1 Catalogues and Indices 

(1) "A Concise Index To The Transactions 
of The Quatuor Corona ti Lodge No. 
2016, Vols. 1 - 80" compiled by A.R. 
Hewitt and H.G. Massey Quatuor 
Coronati Lodge No. 2076, London 1971 

(2) "Miscellanea Index - Volumes I - IX 
(1933 - ,1970)" compiled by William 
G. Peacher, P.S.M. published by the 
Grand Council of the Allied Masonic 
Degrees of the United States of 
America (undated) 

(3) Index to Canadian Masonic Research 
Association papers 

Papers (1949 - 1975) 
CMRA April 1975 

(4) "A Catalogue of the Masonic 
Collection of A.J.B. Milborne Housed 
in the Public Archives, Ottawa, 

by Glenson T. Jones 

produced as a 125 th Anniversary 

Project for the Grand Lodge of 

Canada in the Province of Ontario in 


8.2 Operative 

(1) "The Mediaeval Mason" 

by Douglas Knoop and G.P. Jones 
Manchester University Press, 1933 

(2) "Constitutions Rules and Regulations" 
Published under the authority of 
The Worshipful Society of Free 


Masons Rough Masons, Wallers, 
Slaters, Paviors, Plaisterers and 
Bricklayers London. 27th September, 

8.3 Speculative 

8.3.1 General 

(1) "History Of The Ancient And 
Honorable Fraternity Of Free And 
Accepted Masons and Concordant 

written by a board of Editors 
Henry Leonard Stillson, Editor-in- 

William James Hughan, European 

The Fraternity Publishing Company, 
Boston, N.Y. 1904 

(2) "Mackey's Revised History of 
Freemasonry" (7 volumes) by Robert 
Ingham Clegg, 33° & William James 

The Masonic History Company, 
Chicago, New York, London, 1921 

(3) "History Of The York And Scottish 
Rite Of Freemasonry" by Henry 
Ridgely Evans, Litt. D. 

The Masonic Service Association Of 
The United States 1924 

(4) "Masonic Organizations and Allied 
Orders and Degrees" by Harold V.B. 
Voorhis, B.F., F.P.S. 

Press of Henry Emmerson, New York, 


(5) "The Centenary Of St. James Lodge 
No. 74, A.F. & A.M. South Augusta, 
Ontario, 1857 -1957 by Howard W. 
Warner, July 10, 1956 

(6) "Freemasons* Guide and Compendium" 
by Bernard E. Jones, P.A.G.D.C. 
George G. Bar rap & Co. Ltd. London 
New and Revised 1956, reprinted 1979 

(7) "George Canning Longley And His 300 
Degrees" by M.W. Bro. R.V. Harris 
CMRA #54, 1960. 

(8) "Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia" by 
Henry Wilson Coil, 33° 

edited by Dr. William Moseley 

Brown, 33° 

Dr. William L. Cummings, 33° 

& Harold Van Bur en Voorhis, 33° 

Macoy Publishing & Masonic Supply 

Company Inc., New York 1961 

(9) "The Rise Of The Ecossais Degrees" 
Proceedings of the Chapter of 
Research of The Grand Chapter of 
Royal Arch Masons of the State of 
Ohio, Volume X : 1965 

The Otterbein Press, Dayton, Ohio 

(10) "Fringe Masonry in England 1870 -85" 
by Ellic How 

AQC Vol. 85 (1972), pages 242 to 295 

(11) "Freemasonry And Its Etiquette" 

by William Preston Cambell-Everden 
Weathervane Books, New York, 1978 

(12) "Beyond The Craft" 
by Keith V. Jackson 
Lewis Masonic, London 1980 


(13) "Harry Carr's World of Freemasonry" 
Lewis Masonic, London 1984 

8.3.2 Craft 

(1) "The History Of Freemasonry In 
Canada - Vols. I & II" 

by J.Ross Robertson, PGM 

George A. Morang & Co., Toronto, 


(2) "Freemasonry In The Province Of 
Quebec - 1759 - 1959" 

by A.J.B. Milborne, P.D.D.G.M. G.L.Q. 
Knowlton, P.Q. 1960 

(3) "Grand Lodge 1717 - 1967" 

Printed for the United Grand Lodge 

of England 

University Press, Oxford, 1967 

(4) "The Collected Prestonian Lectures, 
1925 - 1960" 

The Quatuor Coronati Lodge #2076, 
London 1967" 

(5) "The Collected Prestonian Lectures, 
Vol.2, 1961 - 1974" 

Lewis Masonic, London 1980 

(6) "The Beginnings Of Freemasonry in 

by Melvin M. Johnson 
Masonic Book Club 1983 

8.3.3 York Rite 

(1) "The York Rite Of Freemasonry" 
by Frederick G. Speidel 1978 

132 Royal Arch 

(1) "Freemasons' Book Of The Royal Arch" 

by Bernard E. Jones 

George G. Harrap & Company Ltd., 

London, Toronto, Wellington, Sydney 


(2) "The Royal Art, A History of Royal 
Arch Masonry in British Columbia and 
the Yukon" 

by R. Jack Meek, Grand Historian 
Grand Chapter of British Columbia 
and the Yukon, June 1, 1984 

(3) "The Cryptic Rite of Freemasonry in 

by Clifford E. Rich 
CMRA #105, 1972 

(4) "The Cryptic Rite, An Historical 

by Colonel R.J.L. Wilkinson, O.B.E. 
The Grand Council of Royal and Select 
Masters of England and Wales, 1977 Cryptic Rite 

(1) "The Cryptic Rite: 

Its Origin and Introduction To This 


by J. Ross Robertson (including 

Joshiah H. Drummond) 

Hunter, Rose & Co. , Toronto 1888 

(2) "A History of the Cryptic Rite" 

by E.E. Hinman, R.V. Denslow & C.C. 


authorized by the General Grand 

Council R & S.M. of the U.S.A., 1931 

133 Ark Mariner 

(1) "The Royal Ark Mariner Degree - Its 
Origin and History" 

by R.W.Bro. R.M. Handfield-Jones, 
M.C., Grand Librarian September 1968 

(2) "The Royal Ark Mariner Degree Part I 
-History, England, Scotland, 
Ireland, Canada" 

by William G. Peacher, M.D. 
Collectanea, Vol. 12 Part 1, 1983 
Grand College Of Rites Of The United 
States of America 

(3) "The Royal Ark Mariner Degree Part 
II - United States" 

by William G. Peacher , M.D. 
Collectanea, Vol. 12 Part 2, 1985 
Grand College Of Rites Of The United 
States Of America Knights Templar 

(1) "History Of The Knights Templars Of 

by J. Ross Robertson 

Printed by Hunter, Rose & Co., 

Toronto, 1890 

(2) "The Story Of Lodge 'Glittering 
Star' No. 322 (Irish) (1759-1966) 
And The Beginning Of Knight Templary 
In Canada" 

by Reginald V. Harris, P.S.G.M. 


CMRA #86, 1966 

134 Knight Templar Priests 

(1) "Knight Templar Priest as a 'Rite of 
Memory ' " 

by G.E.W. Bridge 

Past Deputy Grand High Priest, 1960 

(2) "Appendant Degrees" 

by H.B. Ray lor , Grand High Priest, 

(3) "Grand College f England and Wales 
and its Tabernacles Overseas 

by H.B. Ray lor, Grand High Priest 
(undated but post June 1979) York Rite College 

(1) The York Rite Sovereign College of 
North America - 1957 - 1982 
by Robert S. Spencer and James F. 

8.3.4 Scottish Rite 

(1) "The Story Of The Scottish Rite Of 

by Harold V.B. Voorhis, 33° 

Press of Henry Emmerson, New 

York, 1965 

(2) "History Of The Supreme Council 33° 
-1861 - 1891 A.A.S.R. of 
Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction" 
by James D. Carter, 33° 

The Supreme Council, 33°, 
Washington, D.C. 1967 

(3) "History Of The Supreme Council 33° 
- 1891 -1921 A.A.S.R. of 


Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction" 
by James D. Carter, 33° 
The Supreme Council, 33°, 
Washington, D.C. 1971 

(4) "The History Of The Supreme Council 
33° Ancient And Accepted Scottish 
Rite Of Freemasonry Of Canada 1874 - 

by a special committee of the 
Supreme Council, 1978 

(5) "Rose Croix" 

The History of the Ancient and 

Accepted Rite for England & Wales 

by Brig A.C.F. Jackson, CVO, CBE, 


Lewis Masonic, London 1980 

8.3.5 Royal Order Of Scotland 

(1) "The Royal Order Of Scotland" 
by Harold V.B. Voorhis 

Press of Henry Emmerson, New York, 

(2) "The Royal Order Of Scotland" 
by Robert Strathern Lindsay 
edited by A.J.B. Milborne 
published with the authority of the 
Executive Committee by the Grand 
Secretary, Dr. A.F. Buchan 

94a George Street, Edinburgh, 
EH2 3DF, 1971 

8.3.6 Red Cross of Cons tan tine 

(1) "What Is The Red Cross Of 
Constantine? A Brief Summary of the 


Purpose of These Degrees and Orders" 
by Edward A. Glad, Grand Recorder 
Grand Imperial Council of the 
Imperial, Ecclesiastical and 
Military Order of the Red Cross Of 
Cons tan tine And Appendand Orders for 
the United States of America, 
Mexico and the Philippines 
Third Edition, July, 1955 

(2) "History Of The Red Cross Of 
Constantine In Canada: 

by Reginald V. Harris, Grand 


Grand Imperial Conclave of Canada, 

August 4, 1961 

(3) "The Order Of The Red Cross Of 

by Harold V.B. Voorhis 

Press of Henry Emmerson, New York 

57, N.Y., 1963 

(4) "The History And Origin Of The 
Masonic And Military Order Of The 
Red Cross Of Constantine and The 
Appendant Orders Of The Holy 
Sepulchre And Of St. John The 
Evangelist - An Analytical Survey" 
Published under the authority of the 
Grand Imperial Conclave, London 1971 

8.3.7 " Societas Rosicruciana 

(1) "A History Of Organized Masonic 
Rosicrucianism: Societas 


by Harold van Buren Voorhis, IX° 
Supreme Magus Emeritus, 1983 

8.3.8 Allied Masonic Degrees 


(1) "Masonic Order Of St. Lawrence The 

Miscellanea, Vol. 4 (1948), pages 


Grand Council Of Allied Masonic 

Degrees of The U.S.A. 

(2) "Masonic Order Of St. Lawrence The 

Miscellanea, Vol. 5 (1950), pages 


Grand Council Of Allied Masonic 

Degrees of The U.S.A. 

(3) "Red Branch of Eri" 
Miscellanea, Vol. 6 (1956), pages 

Frances J. Scully, 

Grand Council of Allied Masonic 

Degrees of The U.S.A. 

(4) "History Of The Allied Masonic 
Degrees Of The United States Of 

by Harold V.B. Voorhis, K.G.C. 
published by The Grand Council Of 
The Allied Masonic Degrees Of The 
U.S.A. 1971 

(5) "A Century Of The Allied Masonic 
Degrees An account of the Order of 
the Allied Masonic Degrees of 
England and Wales and Territories 
Overseas, with some notes on the 
Degrees under its jurisdiction" 

by H.H.C. Prestige, C.B.E., M.A. , 


Privately Printed for the Allied 

Masonic Degrees, London, 1979 


(6) "The Royal Order Of Eri 

- Some Notes on the Origins of the 


by Andrew Stephenson, Chancellor 

London, 1985 

8.3.9 Other Rites Knight Masons 

(1) "The Evolution of Knight Masonry" 
by J. McC. Allen 

published by the Grand Council of 
Knight Masons of Ireland, 1977 




R.W.Bro. Brian Rountree* 

I would like to express my thanks to 
W.Bro. Jones for this informative paper. I'm 
sure many members of the HERITAGE LODGE will 
appreciate having this information collected 
into one presentation. The 59 works referred 
to certainly represent a wide cross-section of 
Masonic Appendant Orders and offer the curious 
readers the beginnings of avenues of research 
which may be taken through their own Grand 
Lodge Libraries. 

W.Bro. Jones has done an admirable job of 
sorting through the facts, fancy and rhetoric 
associated with the Orders he discusses, 
particularly that of the Ancient and Accepted 
Scottish Rite: the story of Stephen Morin and 
the growth of the Rite is very involved and it 
is a marvel that the author has been able to 
discuss it in just over one page. 

The Royal Order of Scotland is mentioned 
in two places. In the first, at the beginning 
of section 5, W.Bro Jones tells us that the 
Order was formed in 1750 and then "seems to 
have disappeared about the time of the 
formation of the Grand Lodge of the Ancients 
(1751). "While it is certainly possible for 
this to have happened in only one year, I 
cannot reconcile it with the note by Bro.F. 

*This response was read in Lodge by W.Bro. 
Donald Moore. 


Smyth that the Order worked from the granting 
of the warrant in 1750 until the early 1800s 
and was then in abeyance until it was revived 
in 1839 (The Pocket History of Freemasonry, 
p. 240). Perhaps W.Bro. Jones could explain 
this a bit more. 

I would appreciate further information on 
the term "Grand Lodge and Grand Chapter" of 
the (Royal) Order. Keith Jackson mentions 
that the designated title is the "Grand Lodge 
of the Royal Order of Scotland" (Beyond the 
Craft, p. 57) although F. Smyth indicates that 
the two degrees conferred are (i) Heredom of 
Kilwinning (in a Provincial Grand Lodge) and 
(ii) Knight of the Rosy Cross (in a Provincial 
Grand Chapter). 

I confess that for the longest time I was 
one of those Masons who assumed that the 
Revival of 1717 meant that the Grand Lodge was 
in charge of the whole of England, even though 
I knew that the rural lodges did not in the 
beginning respond to the new Grand Lodge. So 
I was set to argue about the restriction of 
the authority of this Grand Lodge to London 
and Westminster. That is, until I recently 
re-read Anderson's Constitutions, and William 
Preston who states that the four founding 
lodges were "the only four lodges in being in 
the South of England at that time" 
(Illustrations of Masonry, p. 209). Further on 
he states that "the revival of Masonry in the 
South of England did not interfere with the 
proceedings of the fraternity in the North" 
(p. 219) referring to the Grand Lodge of All 
England, at York. 

In his history of "The Province of York, 
1710-1970" Bro. A.D.C. Grasby indicates that a 
lodge composed of speculative masons existed 


in the 1620s, earlier than the 1646 date 
mentioned by W.Bro. Jones and other authors. 

On the whole I enjoyed the paper. I 
noticed that W.Bro. Jones achieved his purpose 
and did it in a very readable style of 
writing. I would recommend that the Order and 
Rites which will be talked about be mentioned 
or listed in the beginning of the aritcle. 
And perhaps the sections could have further 
sub-headings for the ease of the reader in 
finding a particular Rite. 

I agree that there is room for several 
more papers derived from this one. 

1. An explanation of why and when the 
wording of the eleventh "Ancient Charges 
and Regulations" was shortened. In 
section 3 W.Bro. Jones indicates that the 
full wording appeared in the Consitution 
of the U.G.L. of England in 1827. But it 
is only the abbreviated form which 
appears now in the 1970 copy which I 
have, and in \ihe recent Constitutions of 
Manitoba and Ontario. 

2. To trace the Rites and Orders which W. 
Bro. Jones discussed to formation of 
their respective Grand Bodies in Canada. 

3. To discuss some of the other Bodies 
formed in the 1800s — 

i. Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia 
ii. Allied Masonic Degrees 
iii. Red Cross of Cons tan tine 

I wish to express my thanks to R.W. Bro. 
David Bradley for arranging for me to review a 
draft copy of this excellent paper. 



The following names of deceased brethren 
have come to our attention during the past 
year. Some dates of death were not known. 

Lebanon Lodge No. 139 
Died April, 1986 

Stoney Creek 
Doric lodge No. 121 
Died May 7, 1986 


Birch Cliff Lodge No. 612 


Port Dover 

Erie Lodge No. 149 

Died May 8, 1986 

(Charter Member) 
Wyndham Lodge No. 688 
Died January, 1986 

(Charter Member) 
New Hope Lodge No. 279 
Died May, 1986 



J.B. Hall Lodge No. 145 

Died April 11, 1986. 



M.W.Bro. A. Lou Cope land 
7449 Victoria Park Avenue, Markham, L3R 2Y7 

R.W.Bro. William R. Pellow 
240 Wharncliffe Rd.N., Suite 300, London, N6H 4P2 

M.W.Bro. Robert Davies 
P.O.Box 217, (363 King St.W. ) Hamilton,L8N 3C9 


Worshipful Master 


Immediate Past Master 


Senior Warden 


Junior Warden 








Assistant Secretary 


Senior Deacon 


Junior Deacon 


Director of Ceremonies 


Inner Guard 




Senior Steward 


Junior Steward 






Robert S.Throop 
C.Edwin Drew 
Albert A. Barker 
Edsel C. Steen 
Arthur W.Watson 
Duncan J.McFadgen 
W. Gray Rivers 
George F. Moore 
Edmund V. Ralph 
Donald Kaufman 
David C. Bradley 
Wilfred T.Greenhough 
Donald D. Thornton 
Frank G. Dunn 
Stephen H. Maizels 
Leonard R. Hertel 
Gregory C.Robinson 




(U.D. ) 


















Jacob Pos 
Jacob Pos 
Keith R. Flynn 
Donald Grin ton 
Ronald E. Groshaw 
George Zwicker 
Balfour LeGresley 
David C. Bradley 
C. Edwin Drew 






Masonic Information 








Central Data Bank 




Specil Events 





Glen T. Jones 
Jacob Pos 
David C.Bradley 
Donald D.Thornton 
Richard D.Quinton 
Alan D. Hogg 
F.James M. Major 
Balfour LeGresley 
Kenneth L. Whiting 
James Curtis 
Kenneth G.Bar tie tt 

The Corporation: 


J. Pos 

E.V. Ralph 

56 Castlegrove 

Don Mills, M3A 1L2 



Worshipful Master 1982 - 83 


April 7, 1929, Newcastle, Ontario. 
Grew up on a large dairy farm. 


Newcastle High School and Albert College, 


Ryerson Institute of Technology: 

Photographic Arts 1951-54 

University of Toronto: B.A. , 1958; 

M.Ed. (OISE) 1970. 

Professional: (Teaching Science and Chemistry) 

Etobicoke Collegiate Institute. 5 years. 
White Oaks Secondary School, Oakville, 
4 years, (founded Science Department). 
Faculty of Education, Univ. of Toronto, 
17 years, teaching chemistry. 

Masonic i 

Initiated in Durham Lodge No. 66, 

Newcastle, 1955. 

Affiliated with University, Lodge No. 

496, Toronto, 1964; W.M. 1974. 

Toronto Valley Scottish Rite, , 32 deg. , 



Secretary, Toronto District 7, Senior 

Wardens Assoc. 1973. 

Ch. Member The Heritage Lodge No. 730, 


Grand Senior Warden, 1980. 

Member of the following Masonic Research 

Associations: Quatuor Coronatti (London 

England) ; Missouri Lodge of Research, 

Phoenix Lodge of Research (Paris); 

Philalethes Society; Masonic Book Club; 

Canadian Masonic Research Association, 

V.P. for Ontario 1973 - 76. 


instituted : September Z\,\m 

(EmiBtttutEu: g-eptember 23. 1978 

"i^ton-l^wkr <ftaotue<|empk 

^plication forjVffiU aii otj 

(To ti)e I^Dot^^lHaster^drDens arjiiBrethmi of 'Gfot 
l}ei^eipitoe$o730, of the (5par)oXo55c of &£ S'A.lR.of 
l&tuoa, ir) tfjic£Voou)LV of <|h]tario. 

l._ _ _tf 

(VC AJ)D«i iS I 

_.__Tfo$tal(&>&e telephone* ) 

in the (Jbuijhj of uj tije J&nntjce of Ontario 

(^ccupattoi) Date of Birth 

toty a 't»u „*»**.»«> Kflasot), atjb toirous of becormiy a 
tictt)bcrof3fce^crita3e]&5seHo.Z30,5o Declare aafollou)*: 

I an) tjot it] debt to atjy Iptoje for fcueo or oftjeruri^e. 

liuaelmhateft ____lWedai)&lWeedii) ._ 

Cotoje Ho. at _ ut)der tt)e jurteDietioi) of 

ije Cfeutflp&jeof ar)5 an) ujaoob Hlaecrrric 

rtattfrttjg.i gSSflK a njenjber of iStojeNb. 

Dated at tijte Day of 19 

^igtjature i^fidl_ _ 
iRecammended bg: 1 



1 lu- Heritage Luckw No. 730 



I'hc Heritage Lodge 

No. 730